Toronto's foreign policy proposal

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

The following excerpts are from the City of Toronto web site:

From Report to Executive Committee: Update on Toronto Gun Violence Strategy

Stronger U.S. gun controls
Any strategy to stem the flow of illicit guns onto our streets must address the varying
degrees of gun control enforced by U.S. states. Canada’s gun laws are seriously
undermined by the close proximity of U.S. states that provide easier access to guns. Each
of the fifty states has its own constitution and laws regarding guns. Most of the states'
constitutions provide for some form of state-level right to keep and bear arms. This
discrepancy leads to conditions where firearms can be easily and legally acquired in the
U.S. and then illegally diverted to criminal groups and individuals in Canada.
Considerable support will be needed to pressure the U.S. government to deal with this
troubling situation.

From Mayor David Miller's letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper

The Government of Canada must take action to address gun violence and to
assure Canadians that individuals and families are safe and our communities are secure.
The federal government must also assume the leadership needed to convince the
Government of the United States to impose further gun controls within its jurisdiction.
The U.S. must also strengthen its border security and anti-smuggling efforts to stop
illegal handguns from entering our country and making their way onto our streets.



I hear a lot on this board about how the US needs to quit sticking our nose in other countries business. I would be interested to here opinions on Canada sticking their nose in ours. Thanks in advance.


David

[melm00se]

1. i have always

questioned this finger pointing.

NYS has some of the stronger gun control laws in the USA, especially when it comes to handguns and the border crossing closest to Toronto is Buffalo.

[iverglas]

4. fascinating

If you cared to learn something about the topic before talking about it, you might know that New York State is not a major source of firearms trafficked into Canada.

Ohio is one, I believe. Southern states are another major source. They may enter Canada through Buffalo (although that isn't actually the most significant entry point, I believe). Why you would think that meant they had to originate there, or that anyone was saying they did, I dunno.

Must be hard to point a finger when your aim is so bad.

[Boomer 50]

2. Canadians need to keep their noses out of our legislative process

If they feel that guns are crossing the border from the US, then they can man the border and lock it down on their side. Problem solved. They have no right or excuse to try to dictate our laws. But if they want to go down that path, they better remember, that it's a two way road. We can do the same to them.

[iverglas]

5. Awwwwwww

They have no right or excuse to try to dictate our laws.

How about the reality: we have no ABILITY to dictate your laws, and nobody is trying to. Poor put-upon widdle guys.

But if they want to go down that path, they better remember, that it's a two way road. We can do the same to them.

Jeezus fucking christ. Do you people know NOTHING?

Google "Marc Emery".

Google "Softwood lumber".

It's a one-way road, sweetums. The US tells everybody else in the world what to do, and backs it all up with whatever looks most likely to work in the circumstances: if you're Iraq, you get bombed; if you're Canada, you get years and billions of dollars of illegal tariffs imposed on your exports.

What with the US economy circling the drain, the latter problem might soon be a thing of the past. Won't be able to export things to a country with no money anyhow. You can all live without the Canadian softwood lumber that your construction industry depends on, and sleep in your cars. Be happy!

[newfie11]

7. I totally agree with you.

I am ashamed of what the US has done to other countries. I can only hope this stupid war will somehow be a wake up call for the future.

As far as guns go I do have a concealed carry permit. I also have a rifle in my truck. This is very rural area and it could be hours before the sheriffs department or highway patrol shows up.I would think areas in central and western Canada have the same problem.

It is my understanding to bring a rifle into Canada it must be broken down and wrapped up. I have been to Canada but came "unarmed".

[Kolesar]

3. The US tobacco companies orchestrated smuggling cigarettes into Canada to evade taxation

They shamefully used one of the native American tribes as an intermediary because they already bought the products in huge quantities. So, I can see why Canadians would be concerned about smuggling guns and arms across the border.

[iverglas]

6. Yuppers

They did indeed -- several US tobacco companies were involved. I think that particular mess is still being sorted out. I happen to have had access to some of the evidence, and that was quite the enormous criminal conspiracy, that was. But who are we to complain that our tax structure and security were undermined by these criminal activities on the part of US citizens?

As has been being discussed here (prompting this silly thread), it's difficult to estimate the numbers of firearms trafficked into Canada from the US. Only so many "crime guns" are recovered, and they're obviously the tip of an iceberg. It's known that handguns in particular are both stolen from Canadian sources and smuggled from the US. Estimates of which source accounts for what proportion will vary from year to year, depending on what firearms are recovered in seizures and whether they can be traced, and what other intelligence is available.

There are two problems, and it makes no sense to address one (domestic trafficking) and not the other (cross-border trafficking).

I don't know what anyone here might imagine that international relations consists of, if not states urging and pressuring other states to do things that the first think are in their interests.

Cities have been described as the orphans of the modern world. They are the focal points of the major problems of our day, and yet they have no power or budget to solve the problems. Toronto is no different from any large city anywhere in North America or other parts of the world in that respect. Non-urban populations have hugely disproportionate representation at higher levels of government -- federal, provincial/state -- and politicians are rewarded for catering to their resentment of the cities. Cities are the real engines of the economy, buy are left to fester in expensive social and economic problems that are inherent in metropolis, all so that the tiny minority pretending to live the peaceful pastoral life of a previous century isn't required to shoulder responsibility for any of the needs that come with the prosperity that cities deliver.

[Kolesar]

8. The legislative districts in Ohio were gerrymandered to take power away from the cities

Consequently, the "leadership" of the Ohio legislature has been these socially conservative farm-belt types who have no concern for issues like public education or infrastructure. There is a lot of wealth being created in Ohio agriculture, but these "types" won't acknowledge that it was the enabling technology of highways and infrastructure that made the farmers successful. They think that the thing to do now is to cut social spending.

[iverglas]

9. those are the very ones

And the same ones who got laws passed permitting half of Ohio to wander the streets festooned in firearms. 'Cause what happens in cities ain't their problem.

[Kolesar]

10. The Cleveland newspaper excoriated the legislators who overruled local concealed weapons bans

GOPs are all for local power or returning power to the people. Then, an opportunity comes up to demagogue a wedge issue and they vote with the weapons industry.

[Spoonman]

34. And Canadian companies smuggled HUGE amounts

of liquor into the US during prohibition.

In fact Canadian liquor was the single largest source of illegal liquor nation wide at the time.

You could avoid the appearance of hypocrisy by chastising Canada as well.

[iverglas]

11. just by the way

In point of fact, firearms trafficked into Canada from the US have largely been acquired illegally inside the US: by straw purchasers from dealers, by ineligible purchasers at gun shows, etc.

You got a problem with somebody suggesting you enforce your existing laws?

I thought youse guys liked that idea ...

[apocalypsehow]

12. Phony Baloney.

On so many levels, I don't know where to begin.

The United States government routinely "sticks its nose" right in to just about any situation that ruffles its feathers - and I'm not talking about Iraq and other related illegal wars. Let's take a stroll down the lane of U.S. "nose-sticking," and take a look:

Item: as we speak, the United States government is so bent out of shape about the flow of drugs into our country (sparked by a seemingly insatiable craving for such drugs from our citizens) that we have sent para-military law enforcement personnel into any number of Central American nations. Take a long hard look at that sentence again: we are enforcing our laws with our law enforcement personnel on the soil of another country. Of several other countries, in point of fact. Looks a lot like "nose-sticking" to me.

Item: the United States dislikes the government of Cuba, even though it has been decades since Cuba has ever been even the slightest fig of a threat to us (and it never was a very serious one, in any event). So the United States maintains an embargo on that nation out of, oh, I don't, sheer spite I guess you'd say. Now, are we content to just maintain our own embargo and leave it at that? Noooooo, see we routinely bully other nations into curtailing their trade with Cuba, or at least limiting it in any number of ways. This doesn't work with Europe, Canada, and any number of other countries that aren't dependent on our largess: they have all quite properly told us to go pound sand regarding this matter. Others have complied with our government's wishes in any number of ways, and to varying degrees. The point is if that's not doing a little "nose-sticking," I don't know what is.

Item: the United States government has its icky nose stuck deep into the cesspool of right-wing anti-choice politics on a world wide scale. It has promulgated a policy that ties aid to such wispy notions as "abstinence only" in poor and developing countries around the world, as well as noxious anti-choice bullshit. This often involves UN programs that could save any number of poor women's lives, but since Jesus spoke to W and told him how to proceed in these matters, it's been to hell with the women and how would you like a KJV to go with that abstinence only pamphlet? It really is a quite disgusting version of "nose-sticking."

Item: I don't remember the details, and don't really have the time to Google it, but I seem to recall that a few years back Canada or one of the European countries was considering a serious liberalization of its drug laws, particularly related to cannabis. Did the United States government keep its prim nose out of what is, by definition, an internal affair of a sovereign nation? It did not: IIRC there was all sorts of puffery and snorts of outrage, coupled with not so subtle threats to hold up trade deals and the like.

Now, there may well be good reasons that one sovereign nation feels obligated to "stick its nose" into the internal affairs of another. The punitive actions taken by the U.S. against the apartheid government of South Africa was certainly one prime example of some excellent (if overdue) "nose-sticking": that loathsome government deserved to have it internal affairs mucked around with. And a case could be made that our drug laws and the way in which they are being flouted might justify some "nose-sticking" into, say, the internal affairs of Columbia. I don't make the latter case; I just point out one could be made. In this case, one of our neighbors is being harmed by the flow of a product we refuse to properly regulate, to wit, firearms. I dare say that if the roles were reversed, and we perceived that we were being significantly harmed by the flow of an illegal (within our own borders) product that Canada refused to lift one finger about, the Marine Corps would be in Ontario quicker than you can say "the shores of Tripoli," and Stephen Harper would be down in GITMO as a "detainee" awaiting one of our infamous, illegal, and bogus "tribunals."

So please spare us this chest-thumping about those mean Canadians, and their "nose-sticking."

[iverglas]

13. that was us ;)

Did the United States government keep its prim nose out of what is, by definition, an internal affair of a sovereign nation? It did not: IIRC there was all sorts of puffery and snorts of outrage, coupled with not so subtle threats to hold up trade deals and the like.

A Cdn Senate committee recommended decriminalization of cannabis a couple of years ago.

And that was one of the charming Republican hacks you guys send up here in ambassador's clothing to keep us in line, doing the sabre rattling about trade.

I didn't want to mention it. ;) It generally just brings out the calls for us to grow spines up here ...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

20. I think you need to reread my original post.

Because I don't understand what you are blathering on about.

David

[iverglas]

23. do YOU ever read any of your posts??

You could start with the one I'm replying to, and follow your instruction to reread your original post.

I'll make it easy for you. This is what YOU said in your original post:

I hear a lot on this board about how the US needs to quit sticking our nose in other countries business. I would be interested to here opinions on Canada sticking their nose in ours. Thanks in advance.

Now if you seriously can't figure out what the post you have just replied to has to do with that, well, ...



http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068327/quotes

(on the pronunciation of "phlegm")

Brian Roberts: P H is always pronounced as F, and, uh, you don't sound the G.
Natalia Landauer: Then why are they putting the G, please?
Brian Roberts: That's, that's a very good question, but rather difficult to explain.
Sally: Try, Brian.
Brian Roberts: Well, uh, it's just there.
Natalia Landauer: So, Mr. Professor, you do not know?
Brian Roberts: No.
Natalia Landauer: Then I am sorry. I cannot help you.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

57. Did I say that was my opinion????

I never said that the US is right or wrong for sticking our nose into other peoples business. I also never gave an opinion on Canada sticking their nose into our business. I simply asked for opinions. So with the point restated and hopefully comprehended this time, I don't see where apocalypse got anything about chest thumping or the idea that I was defending the US foreign policy of intervention. Does that clear it up?

David

[jody]

14. If Canada has a problem with gun crime, then sentence offenders to life in prison. n/t

[iverglas]

15. if Canada wants jody's advice

I'm sure it will ask for it.

If Canada wanted to look like the fascist fortress that the US looks like, we could indeed start sentencing large percentages of our population to life in prison ... and stripping them of those old "civil rights", like the vote ...

We prefer not to. We prefer to do things our own way. And we prefer to do that without another country's domestic policies undermining the welfare of our own population and the security and prosperity of our own society, as happens to be the case now. Damn us for arrogant upstarts, eh?

I wonder how people in the US, and their governments, would react if Canadian law permitted the dumping of toxic sludge into Lake Erie. From the Canadian side, of course.

The answer should give you an idea of how people in Canada feel about the US permitting the dumping of firearms into the market in the US.

[Spoonman]

16. In all fairness......

If the United States wants Iverglas's advice, they will ask for it.

Seeing as you so freely involve and express your opinion in matters of OUR country, I believe Jody has just as much of a right to speak freely about YOUR country, without so much as a peep from you!

Reminds me of something my grandfather once said.

Don't bitch about the smell of your neighbors dogs until you clean up the shit in your own yard.

By the way,

I wonder how people in the US, and their governments

We only have ONE (1) government

The answer should give you an idea of how people in Canada feel about the US permitting the dumping of firearms into the market in the US.

WE don't care what Canada thinks about "the US permitting the dumping of firearms into the market in the US".

Before your start typing out a dissertation of garbage, not all the firearms in Canada come from US, and I don't see you bashing those countries!

[Hangingon]

17. Thank you Spoonman!

[iverglas]

21. I keep waiting for that cut and paste job

Seeing as you so freely involve and express your opinion in matters of OUR country

When will you or anyone come up with an instance of my having done that where

(a) I wasn't asked first
and
(b) the question wasn't one that affects MY country

?


Is stating my opinion that Oleg Volk is a vile piece of shit expressing my opinion on matters in your country? Well, you are apparently stuck with Oleg Volk, so I suppose it is.

Anyway, I didn't say anything about opinions.

I read jody's DIRECTIVE to Canada, and stated that if Canada wanted his ADVICE (which was a nice way of putting it), Canada would ask.

I'm sure you can come up with something I've said that is, as an example of telling someone else what to do without any instruction having been solicited, just as obnoxious as "If Canada has a problem with gun crime, then sentence offenders to life in prison." And that you'll be able to copy and paste it here.


WE don't care what Canada thinks about "the US permitting the dumping of firearms into the market in the US".

And I don't care what you think about blah blah blah. I didn't ask what you thought about blah blah blah.

I asked what people in the US might think about Canada permitting the dumping of toxic sludge into Lake Erie, from the Canadian side. Can't answer, or won't answer?

I guess if anyone objected, we up here would just say BUILD A FUCKING WALL IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT.



Before your start typing out a dissertation of garbage, not all the firearms in Canada come from US, and I don't see you bashing those countries!

Er ... did you have some particular countries in mind? Some secret knowledge that Canadian police services don't seem to be privy to, and you're not going to share?

Do, of course, keep in mind that we're not talking about country of manufacture, duh.


Now you sound like you could use a nice cup of tea. Vile stuff, if you ask me, but some find it calms the nerves.

[Spoonman]

26. Tell Toronto to PUCKER up,

and "paste" their lips on America's ass!

Before I get started remember "Don't bitch about the smell of your neighbors dogs until you clean up the shit in your own yard."

I asked what people in the US might think about Canada permitting the dumping of toxic sludge into Lake Erie, from the Canadian side. Can't answer, or won't answer?

Instead of your hypothetical, lets look at the actual problem.

Canada needs to stop smuggling drugs into the United States!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/05/03/RisingTideGuns/

The final and perhaps most noteworthy factor feeding BC's gun-trafficking surge is BC's bud. This province is renowned for its potent pot, which is highly valued in the states. "We have a significant demand in B.C., and that's driven by the cross-border trade for guns and dope," said Carver.

Guns come north in exchange for pot partly because grow-ops are much more severely criminally prosecuted in the U.S., while gun sales are much more complicated, expensive and restrictive in Canada. Gun purchasers in the United States are often law-abiding citizens who will not be charged for "straw purchasing" guns for another party. Similarly, in BC, marijuana growers are rarely prosecuted - and when they are, sentences rarely exceed $10,000 fines.

From a criminal perspective, it is a win-win trade as far as penalties are concerned, particularly as gun trafficking in Canada is generally prosecuted as a customs violation, not a gun crime. Police officers are hesitant to discuss the situation openly, because they are not at liberty to criticize the legal system.

http://www.thestar.com/article/228267

Clegg said Canadian citizens, hired as mules, drove vehicles with concealed marijuana and ecstasy to various places in the U.S.

The drugs were unloaded and replaced with firearms and ammunition along with cocaine and methamphetamine, and the same mules would drive the vehicle back to Canada.

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/features/blotter/story.html?id=c52b9f91-6194-4b76-80c7-4ef574e03aaa&k=5709

Police said the suspects will face charges related to criminal organization offences, drug exportation, possession of prohibited weapons, drug possession, drug trafficking, conspiracy to traffic in a drug, conspiracy to export a drug and drug production.



Looks to me like the real problem (smell) is in your back yard.

[iverglas]

30. really??

Canada needs to stop smuggling drugs into the United States!!!!!!!!!!!!

And here I just assumed you were one of those anti-drug-warriors. If you see what I mean. Anti-warondrugs persons.

You do realize that if the US ended that piece of shit piece of public policy, at least as regards pot, there's be nothing to talk about. Right?

And nobody would want Cdn pot, so nobody could get guns in trade for pot.

You didn't actually think this was all somehow noo 2 mee, did you?

Here. Broaden your cultural horizons:

http://www.tv-eh.com/category/intelligence/

INTELLIGENCE, SEASON ONE

Debuts on DVD May 6, 2008

Paradox Entertainment Group announces the May 6, 2008 DVD debut of Intelligence, Season One, a critically acclaimed crime drama series in the vein of The Wire and The Sopranos from the creator of Da Vinci’s Inquest. The Canadian series has been nominated for 11 Gemini Awards, including Best Dramatic Series, Best Actor, and Best Actress.

Chris Haddock’s Intelligence takes you deep inside the murky world of organized crime and the cops who keep tabs on it. As a dedicated father, respected businessman, and big-time drug smuggler, Jimmy Reardon (Ian Tracey) feels the heat from others muscling in on his territory. Mary Spalding (Klea Scott), the ruthlessly ambitious head of Vancouver’s Organized Crime Unit, fears her rivals in the intelligence community <CIA, FBI, ATF ...> more than she fears criminals. Together, Jimmy and Mary form an uneasy alliance that threatens to undo them both.

http://www.intelligencetv.com/



If you loved Inside the Line, you'll love Intelligence. If you've never heard of Inside the Line ... well, you probably live in the US.



Looks to me like the real problem (smell) is in your back yard.

Well actually, it's on the kitchen window sill at the moment, because it's still considerably too early to plant out, but it will be on the deck in the back yard before long, and the smell will be quite delightful, even though it's called Skunk. Just think, yoo too could grow your own if your gummint stopped applying public policies the result of which is to flood other nations with firearms ... Win/win, eh??

[Spoonman]

36. Holly shit they legalized pot in the US?

You do realize that if the US ended that piece of shit piece of public policy, at least as regards pot, there's be nothing to talk about. Right?

I guess that happened in the last few days

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=5ba203f8-3661-455d-a625-f7fd1c1e843b&k=17996

http://www.startribune.com/local/15326101.html

Although legalizing it would be nice, once again you are so wrong.

It's still illegal, but you knew that!

And nobody would want Cdn pot, so nobody could get guns in trade for pot.

So everyone is lying, ...... all those news stories about pot busts at the border are faked......you and you alone know the truth.

Sorry no sale!

You can keep telling yourself that, but it won't make it true!

[iverglas]

51. good fucking god

I say:

You do realize that if the US ended that piece of shit piece of public policy,
at least as regards pot, there's be nothing to talk about. Right?

and you say:

Holly shit they legalized pot in the US?

and by saying:

once again you are so wrong.

you claim that *I* said that pot has been legalized in the US.

What in the name of Marc Emery are you smoking?

You do realize that if the US ended the piece of shit piece of public policy THAT IS THE WAR ON DRUGS, at least as regards pot, there'd be nothing to talk about.

What on earth did you think I had said, and how on earth could a rational person possibly have thought it?

If the US ended its "war on drugs" to the extent of legalizing pot, there would be no demand in the US for Canadian pot. I already said all this ...

If there was no demand for Canadian pot in the US, there would be nothing for Canadian organized crime to trade for firearms. I already said all this ...

I say:

And nobody would want Cdn pot, so nobody could get guns in trade for pot.

and you say:

So everyone is lying, ...... all those news stories about pot busts at the border are faked...... you and you alone know the truth.

Is English, like, your fourth language? Have you maybe heard of "the conditional"?

Nobody *WOULD* want Cdn pot ("would" being the word I used), *IF* the US ended its piece of shit war on drugs policy.

You can keep telling yourself that, but it won't make it true!

Hey, who needs the fine skunk germinating on my window sill, when I can just visit here. You are a genuine trip.

[Spoonman]

63. Good fucking god?

You can pray all you want, but it won't change what you said, and it damn sure won't make it true.

The issue here is not the number of languages I speak, 3 by the way, it is your inability to rebuttal in a clear, factual and definitive manner.

Untold numbers of people on this board have stated this to you at least a hundred times.

You instead reply with statements that are wordy and open to wide interpretation, without meeting the criteria for a conditional argument. (you must present your argument in a stipulative manner for "the conditional" to apply, you do not do this)

I simply capitalize on this, and turn it back against you.

You then reply with explanations of what you wrote, but they never quite follow what you actually imply in your original statements.

A regional expression for this is known as "crawfishing".

[iverglas]

64. I should be surprised

but my lifetime capacity for surprise has been used up by people like you.

I use words that means something: IF; WOULD.

You do realize that **IF** the US ended
that piece of shit piece of public policy,
at least as regards pot,
there's be nothing to talk about.
Right?

(I really hope that you are not relying on my typo, "there's", as being somehow significant, since "there's be" doesn't actually mean anything, whereas "there'd be" is the obvious intended meaning.)

And nobody **WOULD** want Cdn pot,
so nobody **COULD** get guns in trade for pot.

NOT "the US HAS ended ..." and NOT "nobody DOES want".

And you pretend the words I used mean something else. Something the words simply do not mean in the English language.

You pretend to believe that I have said something that only a complete moron or liar would say: that the US has legalized pot.

And you persist in claiming that I said something I did not say, and that only a complete moron or liar would say: that the US has legalized pot.

And you expect to be regarded as a rational person of goodwill. I assume.

Good luck with that.

[Spoonman]

66. Thank you,

"my lifetime capacity for surprise has been used up by people like you."

I'm glad I could help!

[Spoonman]

68. I forgot

"And you persist in claiming that I said something I did not say, and that only a complete moron or liar would say: that the US has legalized pot."

Please show us all where I claimed you stated that the US has legalized pot.

"only a complete moron or liar would say" That I ever claimed you said that.

I fully comprehend what you said and what it's implications where.

I'll demonstrate a clear, concise, in a nut shell answer for you:

Based on what you said, you imply once again, the guns in Canada are the US's fault because of the "war on drugs policy".

That is so filled with indefensible holes, I won't even waste my time with it!

PS. Tread lightly with the insults, (moron and liar) your deleted reply count has been climbing lately.

[iverglas]

71. "Please show us all where I claimed you stated that the US has legalized pot."

"Please show us all where I claimed you stated that the US has legalized pot."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=166180&mesg_id=166235

"Holly <sic> shit they legalized pot in the US?

... I guess that happened in the last few days

... Although legalizing it would be nice, once again you are so wrong.

It's still illegal, but you knew that!

... So everyone is lying, ...... all those news stories about pot busts at the border are faked......you and you alone know the truth.

Sorry no sale!

You can keep telling yourself that, but it won't make it true!

There you go.



Based on what you said, you imply once again, the guns in Canada are the US's fault because of the "war on drugs policy".

Many of the illicit firearms in Canada would not be here if participants in organized crime activities in Canada had nothing of value to trade for firearms in the US.

If pot were legal in the US, participants in organized crime in Canada would have little of value to trade for firearms in the US.

Can you draw a conclusion from factual premises?



Tread lightly with the insults, (moron and liar)

Dear me. *I* say that if *I* said what you say *I* said, *I* am a moron or liar. I really think I can say whatever I like about *me*, don't you?

Now, what you might want to do is remind yourself of how incivil it is to pretend to think that someone said something that only a moron or a liar would say.

And I think I can use the term "incivil" to my heart's content, really.

[Spoonman]

75. There you go?

Well at least you tried, failed but tried.

I've been told the english language is the difficult to learn.......

But it is clear to see that I never stated you *said* anything.

Many of the illicit firearms in Canada would not be here if participants in organized crime activities in Canada had nothing of value to trade for firearms in the US.

If pot were legal in the US, participants in organized crime in Canada would have little of value to trade for firearms in the US.

Can you draw a conclusion from factual premises?

So the conclusions you want me to draw here are:
1. We should give up our right to bear arms, (to solve Canada's problems)
2. We should legalize pot, (to solve Canada's problems)
3. All of Canada's problems are cause by the evil United States

OK


I'll give you a response that is clear, concise and to the point so you don't have to "draw a conclusion from factual premises"

The Canadian Government can go fuck themselves with their blame everyone else because Canada's is perfect attitude, and start cracking down on criminal activities!

Clear enough?

[jody]

35. "Canadian citizens, hired as mules"! Canada must have lots of happy male donkeys.

:rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

74. That is pretty funny.

Nice post.

David

[Spoonman]

38. By the way, since you asked

When will you or anyone come up with an instance of my having done that where/div]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=166180&mesg_id=166199

"In point of fact, firearms trafficked into Canada from the US have largely been acquired illegally inside the US: by straw purchasers from dealers, by ineligible purchasers at gun shows, etc.

You got a problem with somebody suggesting you enforce your existing laws?"


I don't see where anyone asked for your opinion, and since the problem originates in your country, there you have the answer to your question!

[apocalypsehow]

32. And here I was thinking my exile from GD: P wasn't going to be any fun.

Let's try real hard to keep track here, Spoonman:

1. Someone posts an OP quoting a Canadian website and the Mayor of Toronto, the intent being to huff and puff that Canada should mind its own business.

2. A reply points out that it really is, sorta, Canada's business that we here in the U.S. can't or won't (actually, it's won't) regulate our horrendous traffic in small arms, due to the number of those small arms that wind up killing Canadian citizens on Canadian soil. Just as it would be our business - we would make it our business - if, oh, I don't know, we outlawed nuclear power and containers of plutonium from Calgary kept showing up in Peoria.

3. Your response is to re-quote some idiotic witticism your grandfather once said.

What are we missing here?

You said: "not all the firearms in Canada come from US, and I don't see you bashing those countries!"
I guarantee you that 99.999999% of all the illicit firearms in the Commonwealth of Canada tonight started out in the good 'ole USA.

[Spoonman]

37. OK I'll pull your chain

and you'll have a reason to critique my "idiotic witticism" from my grandfather.

What are you missing here?

Basically all of it, simple enough?

Where did these "criminal groups" get the guns they are smuggling into Canada? They are trading the drugs that they brought into the UNITED STATES for them!

But that wasn't in the OP now was it?

Idiotic witticism, I think not!

"I guarantee you that 99.999999% of all the illicit firearms in the Commonwealth of Canada tonight started out in the good 'ole USA."

Prove it!

Last time I checked firearms were manufactured and exported from all over the world, many of the firearms making their way into Canada are via Asia and Russia.

But since you "guarantee" us this isn't true, you must obviously have the proof, which we will anticipate with bated breath.


I know the *majority* of firearms into Canada come from the US, but why should WE police their borders and citizens for them, and be blamed for their cultural issues.

We have problems of our own to contend with.

[apocalypsehow]

39. Lord have mercy.

You said: "I know the *majority* of firearms into Canada come from the US, but why should WE police their borders and citizens for them, and be blamed for their cultural issues."

Let's try this "neighbor" metaphor you seem so fond of, maybe that'll turn the trick. You and I are neighbors. My septic tank bursts and I just can't bring myself to do a thing about it. So every-time a commode in my house gets flushed, you get a nice helping of shit in your backyard. Now, I doubt you're as pleasant as the average Canadian, but let's pretend, shall we? You call me up and say "neighbor, hate to stick my nose in your septic tank business, but I shore would appreciate it if you'd keep your crap off my lawn. Thanks a million." And I say by way of reply: "why should I police your backyard for you, and be blamed for your piles of shit?"

As most metaphors tend to be, it's an imperfect one. But it gets us in the ballpark, I do believe.

You said: "We have problems of our own to contend with."

One of which is not being a very good neighbor when it comes to our firearms shit gushing onto other folk's lawns.

[Spoonman]

40. Once again

you failed to grasp the reality of the situation, and the context of the original OP.

The problem lies in CANADIANS smuggling guns into Canada, and smuggling drugs into the USA.

GET IT!?

As far how pleasant I am.... I guess you'll have to ask the 10 guys I go hunting with EVERY year for the last 9 years.
Or you can ask the 100 or so people I use to work with 6 months out of the year for 7 years.

They are all from and live in Canada.........

By the way where's that proof you guaranteed us you have?

Never mind, you don't have it, so I'll give you this. (slightly dated, but still valid)

http://www.guncontrol.ca/English/Home/Works/CombatingtheIllegal.pdf

"Toronto Police Service conducted a review of crime handguns submitted to the Gun and
Gang Task Force during 2004 and found over half (52% were smuggled) and almost half
(48%) originated in Canada."

[apocalypsehow]

41. Here we go round the mulberry bush.

"you failed to grasp the reality of the situation, and the context of the original OP"

You need to learn to read better. Or slower. Or something.

"The problem lies in CANADIANS smuggling guns into Canada, and smuggling drugs into the USA"

Afraid not. The problem lies with the ease with which such firearms are obtainable in the United States - not with how they get into Canada. Even if your bratty little kid sneaks into my house and flushes my commode while I'm not looking, it's still shit from my broken septic tank that is flowing onto your lawn.

You're new at this sort of thing, aren't you?

"By the way where's that proof you guaranteed us you have?"

By the way, do you always make stuff up, or just on Wednesdays?

[Spoonman]

43. So many fallacies, so little time

By the way, do you always make stuff up, or just on Wednesdays?

So someone stole your user ID and password and maliciously posted this:

I guarantee you that 99.999999% of all the illicit firearms in the Commonwealth of Canada tonight started out in the good 'ole USA.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=166180&mesg_id=166228

I know, it was one of those craaaaazzzzzed gun zealots!

"The problem lies with the ease with which such firearms are obtainable in the United States"

I'm afraid that is simply a misinformed OPINION, borrowing a quote from you, you're new at this sort of thing, aren't you?

http://www.guncontrol.ca/English/Home/Works/CombatingtheIllegal.pdf

Toronto Police Service conducted a review of crime handguns submitted to the Gun and Gang Task Force during 2004 and found over half (52% were smuggled) and almost half (48%) originated in Canada.

[apocalypsehow]

45. I guess it's just Wednesday evenings, then. Cause you sure are on a roll with it.

Toronto Police Service conducted a review of crime handguns submitted to the Gun and Gang Task Force during 2004 and found over half (52% were smuggled) and almost half (48%) originated in Canada

Close your wee little eyes and concentrate real hard: The. Topic. Under. Discussion. Is. Guns. Smuggled. Into. Canada. From. The. United. States.

Next up: crayons and poster board, with stick figure illustrations.

[Spoonman]

46. Wow, your really having problems with this

"The Government of Canada must take action to address gun violence and to
assure Canadians that individuals and families are safe and our communities are secure."

The problem is withing their borders, as the FACTS CLEARLY SHOW!!!!!!!!!

But yet ALL the blame in the OP is placed clearly on the US.

This starts to get old when I have to explain EVERYTHING!

[apocalypsehow]

48. Wow, "your" really having problems with comprehending the words on the screen in front of you, huh?

I'd get that checked out.

[iverglas]

53. I have always assumed

that there's a secret optician that everybody knows about but me, and s/he sells special spectacles to people who post things about gunz, so that they may look at my own posts and see truly wondrous things that I have never been able to discern.

But then I got smacked one time for asking someone where I could get them, so I never did find out.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

58. You two are real pieces of

work!




Spoonman just smoked both of you with facts and you'll respond with nothing but insults.





David

[Spoonman]

61. As always,

when faced with the facts, they attack my spell checker glitches.

It really is pretty pathetic.

[apocalypsehow]

67. LOL. It really is a fascinating encounter with folks who seemingly speak a similar language,

right down to the vocabulary, grammar, and syntax. But there seems to be some cosmic disconnect between what is said, and what is heard (Or, I guess, seen, in this case).

I say: "The rain is wet."

The reply comes back: "Blame the water, not the rain."

I say: "Well, rain is simply water that falls from the sky, and, in any event, that really has nothing to do with the fact that it's wet."

The rejoinder is: "You have know knowledge of the context of the OP." Or something equally silly.

As I said, fascinating. If I didn't know better, I'd almost think a team of anthropologists somewhere were pulling my leg, and this is really a controlled study of reasonable folks reactions to puzzling responses to discussions in (seemingly) the same language.

[Spoonman]

69. Try using an umbrella when it rains

The tin foil only covers the head.

[iverglas]

70. how dare you!!1!1!

If I didn't know better, I'd almost think a team of anthropologists somewhere were pulling my leg, and this is really a controlled study of reasonable folks reactions to puzzling responses to discussions in (seemingly) the same language.

It is against the DU rules to call other members rats!

Now you're going to write six paragraphs pretending you didn't just call me a rat.


This might be a good place to mention to the assembled masses that my ban from the genealogy discussion board where I like to play has expired. It's easy to get banned from GDP. Get banned from a genealogy board, and then we'll talk.

[apocalypsehow]

44. Jeeze Louise, give me a toke of some of that you're having.

"Toronto Police Service conducted a review of crime handguns submitted to the Gun and
Gang Task Force during 2004 and found over half (52% were smuggled) and almost half
(48%) originated in Canada."

You said upthread: "not all the firearms in Canada come from US, and I don't see you bashing those countries!"

And I countered: I guarantee you that 99.999999% of all the illicit firearms in the Commonwealth of Canada tonight started out in the good 'ole USA

Look at the second part of your sentence: "those countries" directly indicate that you are referring to firearms smuggled into Canada, not the aggregate number of firearms in Canada. Then we get your cute little bait and switch, where we are all of a sudden discussing a different topic altogether.

As I said previously, you're new at this sort of thing, aren't you?

[Spoonman]

47. Bait and switch?

Since when do factual statements constitute bait and switch?

You stepped into the debate of a topic which you have know knowledge of, and started making uninformed statements.

I simply allowed you to do so in order to demonstrate your lack of knowledge.

I then presented you with the facts, and ask you to back up / explain your previous statements.

"As I said previously, you're new at this sort of thing, aren't you?"

[apocalypsehow]

49. Yeah, as in you act like you want to talk about one thing, then pretend you were talking about

something else all along. You know, like they do when they advertise one thing in a store and then....never mind, I don't want to get you all confused. Guess you've never heard of it, so I guess that's sort of like that "know knowledge" thing you were talking about above. Trust me, it's not good.

:rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

59. Quit while you're behind.

You were wrong. You got called on it. Take your beating like a man and let it go.

David

[Spoonman]

62. Debate is like playing poker,

the smart player NEVER shows their entire hand, and gives the opponent just enough "tells" to lead them to defeat.

Of course, demonstrating an opponents low degree of credibility doesn't really help in poker.

[apocalypsehow]

65. Uh-huh. I see cognitive dissonance isn't a singular phenomenon in these parts.

Is it contagious?

[iverglas]

52. hee

It's GDP here all year round! Welcome.

I guarantee you that 99.999999% of all the illicit firearms in the Commonwealth of Canada tonight started out in the good 'ole USA.

Well, maybe close to that many -- but many of them actually were legally owned here, they were just manufactured in the US. ;)

< edit -- oops, I lost the thread there a bit too, and now see your call to order on this point, and of course you're right: "those countries", etc. Context is all. But you'll find, here, that history does not exist. Everything that went before has fallen into a black hole, and cannot be remembered. >

But hmm. I have to wonder whether you've been hanging out with Obama, who thought Canada had a president. Canada was once the Dominion of Canada, and is now a member of the Commonwealth. Maybe you're thinking of, what is it, Massachusetts? They can join the Dominion if they like. They get to keep same-sex marriage!

What are we missing here?

Oh, you don't know what you've been missing!

Can we vote somebody out and send them to GDP in exchange for you??

[apocalypsehow]

72. Thanks.

You said: "It's GDP here all year round! Welcome."

Oh, GDP is a lot nastier than this place, IMHO. Flaming with these folks is a pillow fight compared to the barroom brawl that is GDP right now.

You said: "But hmm. I have to wonder whether you've been hanging out with Obama, who thought Canada had a president. Canada was once the Dominion of Canada, and is now a member of the Commonwealth. Maybe you're thinking of, what is it, Massachusetts?"

To be honest, I pretty much lose the thread of Canadian history after "54-40 or fight!" Didn't we buy Alaska from you folks? ;-)

You said: "Oh, you don't know what you've been missing!"

Yeah, it looks like one tidy barrel of laughs. If I could just put my hands on the lexicon for this place, I think I'd have it made. :-)

[Nebor]

18. Sounds like our problem

Rather than try to dictate the domestic policies of a foreign nation, I suggest Canada do what we've been unable to, secure their southern border. Both Canada and the United States have a serious problem with unregistered illegals flowing across their southern borders. For Canada, it's guns, for the United States, it's people.

That said, I've carried concealed into Canada plenty of times, cumulative weeks spent there on vacation. And since I have so little regard for their laws, I can't expect them to have much regard for ours.

[iverglas]

22. yeah

And we all believe every word of that tale.

Some will claim to, I'm sure.

Visit a lot of places, do you? Enjoy this one!

[Nebor]

24. Answer?

You seemed to fail to address my point, Canada needs to secure it's border if they want to stop the flow of illegal guns. Just like the United States needs to secure it's border if we wish to stop the flow of illegal people.

And there is zero chance of being caught with a concealed handgun at a border crossing. I believe that I have the innate right to carry anywhere it might be necessary to defend myself and my loved ones, and that concealed means concealed. I've carried in pretty much every state in the country, Mexico, Canada, England, France, Germany.... The effectiveness of arms controls in all of those countries are so lax that anyone with even moderate determination to circumvent them can, with ease. I think it's rather silly to have laws and not enforce them, as an American.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nebor]

29. Well what's the solution then?

If a border can't be secured, you seem to think that it's not really worth trying. You could ban every gun in the US, and they would still be here. The amount of illegal firearms that flow across the Mexican border and in through our ports is astonishing.

The main point is that America isn't changing it's domestic policy to attempt to remedy failed domestic policy in a foreign country.

I recognize that I have no say, and no valid opinion on Canada's laws. That's for Canadians to sort out. If they want to ban all their guns, more power to them. If they want to hand out full auto weapons on every street corner, be my guest. Please afford America the same courtesy.

[iverglas]

31. where *do* you get your ideas?

The amount of illegal firearms that flow across the Mexican border

I guess that would be to replace the ones flooding the other way. A sort of continental drift ...



Please afford America the same courtesy.

Hey, if you LIKE the idea of criminals engaging in straw purchases and other assorted illegal purchases and trafficking of firearms inside your border ... which are what the trafficking of firearms into Canada derives from ... well, I'd wonder what you're doing here, but then I wouldn't.

[Nebor]

42. Well...

I don't buy Mexico's claim that people are buying guns in America and smuggling them into Mexico. For a lot of reasons. First of all, it's easier to get illegal guns in Mexico than legal guns in the United States (no background checks.) Second, the penalty for smuggling weapons into Mexico is much, much more harsh than simply possessing the weapons in Mexico (particularly if you're an American.) I realize that a lot of you think that laws are magical, and places that ban guns don't have them, but as someone who's been there, I can tell you it's simply not true. I've seen multitudes of illegal weapons in my life, in many different countries. In some places there's just no way you're going to get caught unless you're an idiot (most of the free world.) In places that actually have the police state necessary to properly regulate the ownership of firearms, arsenals are possessed by people who are politically connected, or friends with the local cops.

I'm not one to push the "law abiding gun" owner bit like a lot of guys. I'm going to do what I feel is right, contrary to any laws, and there is little to no chance of ever being caught. People who have no respect for the law, and no desire to obey it, won't. I'm living breathing proof. And like I said, having seen various strengths of gun control all over the world, the only way you can actually regulate this is with a police state. So if you're willing to give up all the rest of your rights, to take one away from everyone else, knock yourself out.

[iverglas]

56. Gordon Bennett

First of all, it's easier to get illegal guns in Mexico than legal guns in the United States (no background checks.)

And those "illegal guns" in Mexico came from ...


...


...


... yes, I know. Criminals.



Second, the penalty for smuggling weapons into Mexico is much, much more harsh than simply possessing the weapons in Mexico (particularly if you're an American.) I realize that a lot of you think that laws are magical, and places that ban guns don't have them, but as someone who's been there, I can tell you it's simply not true.

Uhhh Huhhh. I think you just directly contradicted yourself, inside of two sentences. It's damned hard to tell, though.


I'm going to do what I feel is right, contrary to any laws, and there is little to no chance of ever being caught. People who have no respect for the law, and no desire to obey it, won't.

You are indeed living breathing proof.

I'm sure that all the people who think triple-heavy-duty-life in prison sentences for doing bad stuff are going to cut crime in half, and that this is all Canada needs to realize to solve its little bullets in the streets problem, will be a tad disappointed in you for saying this, though.


And like I said, having seen various strengths of gun control all over the world, the only way you can actually regulate this is with a police state. So if you're willing to give up all the rest of your rights, to take one away from everyone else, knock yourself out.

Yup, police states. Just like the ones that have, oh, slashed drunk driving rates in a couple of decades, and stuff like that.

And the laws that are directed at ordinary decent people who just need a little incentive to do the right thing -- like not drive drunk, not leave their firearms lying around unsecured, not transfer their firearms to people off the books.

Sociopathic alcoholics are still going to drink and drive. People like you are still going to do anti-social things with your firearms. Myself, I think there are enough people who aren't like you that differences can be made. Hey, if I thought the whole world was like you ... or like you pretend to be for whatever reason you think you have ... I'd pretty much have to shoot myself.

[apocalypsehow]

33. "I've carried in pretty much every state in the country, Mexico, Canada, England, France, Germany"

Methinks someone's watched one too many Ian Fleming flicks.

[Spoonman]

19. No wonder there is such a divide

then illegally diverted to criminal groups and individuals in Canada.

And how are this criminal groups and individuals in Canada the US's fault?

Oh, I forgot, it's the gun that made them criminals!

The U.S. must also strengthen its border security and anti-smuggling efforts to stop illegal handguns from entering our country and making their way onto our streets.

This everyone else should pay for and fix our problems eastern Canada mentality is exactly why over 35% of Canadians from Manitoba west to BC want to be rid of them!

http://www.bcrevolution.ca/separation.htm

We join hands in common chorus and direction with those of the USA and Mexico who champion the interest and life-force of humanity. We salute and celebrate the universal truths of justice, liberty, and equality which bedeck the path forward to independence and sovereignty.

http://www.separationalberta.com/prin.asp

The primary goal of our party is to facilitate a peaceful and orderly separation of Alberta from the Canadian Confederation and form an independent nation with our own constitution based on a true democracy where the will of the people shall prevail.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1123588600678_121/?hub=Canada

The magazine's survey found that 35.6 per cent of respondents from Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia agreed that "Western Canadians should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country."

[iverglas]

25. oh lookie!!!!

It's the loony, vicious right wing fringe in western Canada, being cited as evidence of ... I dunno, something good ... right here at DU.


http://www.separationalberta.com/pol.asp

Reads like a Ron Paul campaign tome.


And I have to thank you for this one:

http://www.bcrevolution.ca/index.htm

Best giggle all day. You realize the outrageous violation of Magna Carta that front page thing is about is a parking ticket?

... Can't read much more of it, since it's all double and triple typed over, on a black background ...


But hey! They luvz their gunz!


But ... c'mon ... can you muster us up a bit of a "the joke's on me" chuckle when you realize you've just got all dewy-eyed about an outfit with this

http://www.bcrevolution.ca/the_king_calls_us_to_arms.htm
"The King Calls Us to Arms
A CALL TO ARMS FROM OUR FORMER KING"

on its website? Snigger.


I gotta hand it to you. You find loons where I didn't even know loons existed.


You really do need to understand, though, when you read things like the Macleans magazine poll, that being malcontent is the Canadian national pastime. Westerners may be particularly good at it, but really, they don't hold a candle to Quebec, do they? You oughta spend some time with Newfoundlanders old enough to remember Joey Smallwood, and hear how they still hate him for making Newfoundland part of Canada ...

[Spoonman]

27. 35.6%

I forgot about the Newfoundlanders, they want to be part of the West too!!

[Indy Lurker]

50. Adopt our usless laws, and maybe they will work.

Sounds like the same thing DC and Chicago preach.

The problem is not that our gun bans have failed, the problem is that our neighbors have not adopted our gun bans.

[beevul]

54. Once again, it needs to be said...

All this finger pointing is such a waste.

If a country, state, county or city wishes to ban a thing...you know, to stop the people that populate it from possessing that thing - maybe it should:

A)Take all the proper and necessary measures to actually acomplish the goal of stopping that thing from entering that country, state, county or city, or;

B)Realise that maybe acomplishing such a thing is just not doable.


That applies equally as much to the war on some drugs in the US as it does to bans of this or that in places where theres more than a tiny segment of the population against said ban.


of course, THAT would make too much sense though, and isn't near as much fun as pointing the finger and passing the buck.

[CHIMO]

55. Here! Hear!

Reference to the site.

http://www.toronto.ca/handgunban/index.htm
http://www.toronto.ca/handgunban/pdf/gunstrategyreport.pdf

As for knowledge of blowback, well perhaps a look at some world opinion.

A long road from Kosovo to Kurdistan
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JB29Ak02.html

[gorfle]

60. I have no problem with this.

I respect the right of nations to peaceably work together to secure their interests.

I'm sure our representatives will work hard to balance international relations with the will of their constituents.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

73. I agree 100%.

Thank you for being one of the first people to give a simple concise answer with a logical explanation.

David