reply to post by Elmocall911
Canada is a feudal monarchistic oligarchy. In any monarchistic oligarchy, the general population has to be disarmed, otherwise, the population will
rise up and out the monarchs and the oligarchy. Canada's laws are structured to protect the "janitors" of crime, the police, they are not designed
to protect the citizenry. A simple example is civil law during the commission of a crime; a burglar enters through the roof, falls and breaks his leg.
He may now sue his intended victim (and win) for damages and it has actually happened. How f**ked up is that?
Have you ever seen the police prevent an initial crime? I know I haven't, they are just "janitors-with-a-gun," like that drain cleaner,
"janitor-in-a-drum." They operate after the fact and do not protect the people. Look at their logo, "To serve and protect." It doesn't say what
they protect. It's not the people though, they serve and protect the law.
To make matters worse, the Queen gave royal accent to joining the EU and now one has to wonder, is Canada still a colony or is it a country? Is the
Governor General even a valid position anymore, or still just another useless twit? That goes for Lieutenant Governors for the provinces as well? The
monarchy it seems has left an awful lot of useless pork hanging around. But one must also question the role of Harper, is he PM or President? PM means
second in command as the Governor General was the Queen's viceroy (and therefore head of state/Canada) under the 1947 Letters Patent by King George.
There's a lot of stuff the sheople don't know yet....
Anyway, US law under the 2nd amendment appears to be a protection for the citizens against criminal activity, both inside and outside the government
as well as a mediation tool against tyranny. It was also set up that way to prevent any foreign power from trying to invade the US which is a bloody
smart move. An invader wouldn't want to fight a defensive population where every man and women can shoot you dead in the streets during an invasion.
Switzerland also has a better rule, every household has to have at least one fully automatic weapon, just in case of invasion. But going back, the US
was set up as a Republic with the Rule of Law (so was South Africa before the Mandela/ANC stupidity).
One of the differences between a socialist democracy and a republic is how law is dealt with. Canada uses a mix of Common Law and written statutes,
which allows for a great deal of interpretation. Right now I would say that probably every Canadian citizen is a criminal in one form or another
according to the laws and precedents. In the US, they operate under the Rule of Law. The law is the law and there is some allowable interpretation,
but not like Canada where they can make things up as they go along.
I have some experience with the US and South Africa, and I live in Canada. In South Africa, if someone broke into your house and threatened you or
stole from you, you were expected to take action, lethal or otherwise because it helped the police maintain order and reduce taxes. Most of us were
armed to the teeth and carried multiple semi-automatic weapons, so everyone as a consequence was polite and generally well mannered because someone is
always faster or has a better aim.
If Canada allowed conceal carry laws, then there would be a positive attitude shift. "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny" as is
the case with most here today. "When the government fears the people there is liberty" which is how it should be. Plus, there would be an increase
in consumerism, eg. gun sales, which would increase employment and at the same time, decrease the taxes we have to pay because there would be more
criminals in the ground than in jail. Personally, I much prefer the US/SA Rule of Law system to the Canadian Kommunistik Kommon Law system.
On your scenarios 1 through 7, it doesn't matter what you do, you will end up being charged in criminal court and/or sued in civil court. It's a win
win for the criminals (both the one attacking and the politicians) as they get to transfer your money and/or your time from you to them by way of the
courts and lawyers.
I could give you many example of situations where common citizens obeyed the rule of law in South Africa and saved the government and taxpayers many
millions of dollars, but, that's another thread and would be a very long one.
Cheers - Dave
[edit on 1/3.2010 by bobs_uruncle]