March 12, 2016

Cross Border Talking: Americans' advice to Canadians? Arm yourselves!

Rebel Staff

With the world on high alert due to threats of terrorism, I get some American advice on how Canadians can best protect themselves in these unstable times.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-03-12 20:22:36 -0500
The problem is the widespread acceptance of cultural Marxism by people who should know better.
Click on the link below and you will see how it is the cause of this decline in our customs, country and religion.
commented 2016-03-12 16:01:19 -0500
Justin in the dustbin . . . So there!
commented 2016-03-12 15:21:18 -0500
You only need to shoot one person (excluding yourself) to solve everybody’s problem. Do I need to mention his name?
commented 2016-03-12 15:09:49 -0500
RE: factors which effect the Canadian police state attitudes towards civilian armed self defense

There has been a considerable body of research into the occupational culture of the police (and its authoritarian political class enablers) which has identified the core elements as being “a sense of mission”; the desire to correct society’s wrongs, also an impulse for action and excitement, especially the promise of legally sanctioned violence and the exclusive entitlement of imposing one’s will on others under force of law – an ‘Us/Them’ mindset of society with its in-group isolation and solidarity on one hand (code of silence), and political components on the other (personal and indoctrinated biases/prejudices) – police culture’s authoritarian approach to social/political solutions and its inherent xenophobic suspicion and cynicism – especially towards civil liberties, charter rights and restrictive proper legal procedures. It is further suggested by these studies that these occupational cultural elements are to be found in large politically-influenced police organisations throughout the world and our personal experiences show us it is no different in Canada.

Common police behaviors and narratives which I have observed would suggest that this culture of “police bossism” has regressed further due to unyielding politicization, superfluous militarization, reactionary abusiveness, legal liability absolution and the entitlement reflex of unionization, to a point where the overall mindset in police training and command structure is not one of public service (The Robert Peel ethic) but that of commanding and deploying an occupying force charged with imposing a politically stratified code of social conduct in an identity group oppressed/oppressors application which bears no resemblance to traditional civil justice. Upper command see themselves as having special interpretive powers of statute law, absolution from constitutional constraints, minimal public accountability and arbitrary law making powers. The new policing industry’s core priority is no longer to protect the public – to defend our rights and property but to intervene in our lives with enforcing the bizzaro constructs of cultural Marxism – even to the point of victimizing the victim. Our police function is a social engineering experiment gone terribly wrong.
This goes a long way to explaining police command chain distrust and condescension for civilians opposed to the escalation of the militarized/politicized police function – it also explains the occupational distain for citizen arrest powers, civilian self defense and civilian firearms ownership. I cite the contemptuous police stone walling and inaction on the High River enquiry as an indicator of this.

Far from creating “community outreach” the current aggressive political agendas and excessive martilism in the police function is creating what is becoming a civilian-hostile “bully” subculture which has the most political influence with Canadian legislators of any special interest political pressure group. Essentially a police state minus the outward trappings of such a system. And police states are uniformly against armed civilian defense capabilities – more hostile towards armed law abiding citizens than armed criminals – armed criminals allow them to expand the police state, armed civilians does not.
commented 2016-03-12 14:33:40 -0500
ANDREW STEPHENSON commented 33 mins ago

Bullshit. You live in fear and the media party amps up “accidents”. There are more accidents on our highways that cause death than “accidents” at home – and that pig Wynne has no intention of fixing the engineered congestion – so much for safety.

Risk is everywhere. Think for yourself instead of memorizing torstar/cbc headlines.
commented 2016-03-12 13:58:17 -0500
More topically, arming yourself isn’t going to stop terrorism. For example, what happened at the Boston Marathon – would still have happened even if everyone was armed to the teeth. Meanwhile, too many firearms greatly increase accidental shootings. You’re far more likely to accidentally shoot your wife or dog than a criminal or “terrorist”.
commented 2016-03-12 13:55:54 -0500
“if you injure or kill the criminal that is breaking into your house and/or threatening you and your family, you will be charged and convicted”

There’s a concept of appropriate force in our interpretations of laws. Basically, what you can reasonably claim as self defence depends on the magnitude of the threat. If your life is in danger then obvious extreme measures could be argued for (although, let’s be honest, murder is murder). On the other hand, someone eying your woman isn’t grounds for shooting him, with other crimes lying somewhere in the middle. In essence, because murder is such a more heinous crime than theft, if you take unreasonable measures you are now a criminal yourself. If you forget to lock your car and catch someone rooting through the change in your console, that’s not worth killing over. Nothing was threatened, the only stake was a handful of change.
commented 2016-03-12 12:02:26 -0500
@bill Elder
Yeah, they know better than we do what they’ve brought over here.
commented 2016-03-12 11:37:11 -0500
Peter Netterville I agree peter. Just make sure there is only one person standing before the judge not two.
commented 2016-03-12 11:36:02 -0500
good advice plenty already have years ago.
commented 2016-03-12 11:11:32 -0500
Arm yourself is good advice, but to be the pessimist here (and no I am not anti-gun) if you injure or kill the criminal that is breaking into your house and/or threatening you and your family, you will be charged and convicted. The criminal will get off with a light sentence at worst or a slap on the wrist more than likely.

I really hate Canada’s hug the thug and mistreat (or ignore) the victim legal system. I say “legal” system because we do not have a “justice” system. I guess what can we expect when many of the lawyers are crooked and they are the ones that are appointed to the judiciary as judges.

Can we expect a crooked lawyer once appointed to be a judge to cease being crooked?
commented 2016-03-12 10:58:07 -0500
commented 2016-03-12 10:29:54 -0500
“Arm yourself” ?
- I think Premier 2moms got the memo. Maybe after he visited his CFB “refugee camp” Junior whispered in her ear that if she isn’t going to wear a burka she may want to arm up.

“In a memo to occupants of Queen’s Park on Thursday, Speaker Dave Levac said that the Legislative Security Service will deploy an “armed response unit” effective March 21. < > all with a view to ensuring Ontario’s seat of parliament is a secure and safe location for legislators, their staff and Assembly staff, visiting school groups, the many dignitaries " – – – and the $6000/plate diners who regularly meet with the Premier and her henchmen behind closed doors no doubt – because, greasy politicians need armed security more than you, – - for obvious reasons.
commented 2016-03-12 10:16:25 -0500
commented 2016-03-12 08:56:49 -0500
Arm yourself – solid advice.

Unfortunately the vast majority of police are actually the enemy and will happily shoot you – with the approval of the majority of spoiled, entitled and smug Canadians.

Nowadays it is difficult to sort the few good cops from the many bad ones.
<-- /_page_stream.html -->