Hey Mike,
No need to get irate. It may be your constitution, but everyone else has the freedom to talk about it. By all means correct them if they make a mistake, but the whole 'don't talk about our stuff' thing doesn't make much sense to me.
You're correct. It's not like Americans won't be found online criticizing Canada's various policies and such.
The one thing that does tend to get on my nerves from people in various countries that go to great lengths to tell Americans about how violent we are, what a violent society we have, etc., is some of them go on to tell us the best way to go about defending ourselves! That gets my nose out of joint. By and large, we do know how to defend ourselves in this environment, some of which is very violent and we don't really need the advice of disarmed people to tell us how to survive in such a place.
That isn't even directed at you, I'm just making a point.
As in the choice to either carry a gun in the woods - or not. Both options represent the exercise of free will and personal liberty.
I don't question someone like Rick who chooses to do this, what I question and criticize is when they go to great lengths to deny reality. Where he is at, it might very well be safe to do so. Down here, different thing entirely. AND, the freedom to own guns is not the problem with the predators either, this original story I posted, the guy had a knife and a "baton." No gun involved so this is a prime example of how a tragedy can unfold without a firearm present at all.
I'm not going to go back over every post to double-check, but I think that just about everyone who has contributed to this thread has come out in support of your right to carry lawfully and responsibly. I sure have. You want to carry on the trails? That's your right, and you'll get no flak from me for exercising it.
And I can't really say that I have observed any Canadian in this thread that I would not love to see immigrate here if they wanted that degree of freedom that you cite. I mean, there is the confused young man that wants to join the police, but, I think we can convert him.
Conversely, though, the "personal freedom and liberty means that every responsible person should carry a gun in the woods and those who don't are gutless subjects" (to paraphrase) crowd has, once again, decided that it is not sufficient for everyone else to respect their opinions and rights - no, we have to follow suit, lest we be branded weak and unprepared. This crowd has also tossed out a slew of remarks about liberals, subjects, and the like.
I have tossed out some red meat about liberals even though I have some liberal views! Don't lump me in with the "crowd" you cite. I think it is accurate to call Brits and Canucks "Subjects" because you are! "Gutless?" That's another thing entirely and I have not said it or even hinted at it.
I DO NOT think anyone who is uncomfortable or unwilling to turn on their awareness as close to 100% as they can get it, constantly, while carrying a gun should carry a gun at all, period. I don't think it is for everyone. Most people that carry a pistol will tell you that it is basically a pain in the ass to do so after a while. Some love doing it so it is a pain they don't even notice. Or we could say, "a drag to carry."
I don't feel like wearing a stiff gun belt, proper holster and a double magazine pouch every day, I can tell you that! I can also tell you that if I were allowed to in my State, I would.
Bottom line: you really can't go on about sacred personal freedoms and, in the same breath, get uptight about those who make different choices - especially if they support your rights.
Well, we can get uptight about people who want to eliminate our rights. I think there is a fine line about having so much free speech that you use it to destroy personal liberties just like shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre is not really free speech unless the theatre is, in fact, on fire.
However, the rest of your statement I agree with. It is personal choice. I feel the same way about vegetarians, vegans, people that don't like guns, knives, hunting, fishing, trapping or any number of things. It's OK if they don't like it and it's perfectly OK if they don't do it. I would never pass a law banning vegetarianism but would declare PETA a terrorist group because they are affiliated with ALF and "ban" them as the Mafia has been banned through law enforcement actions, The RICO Statute, etc.
I don't pass out pamphlets telling people that meat is incredibly healthy and they should switch to an all-meat diet. I don't push paper about the wonderful warmth of fur coats. I expect the same from my fellow humans.
A person who carries a gun and does not understand that they have to be the most aware individual they have ever been in their life and accept the weighty responsibility of carrying and owning every projectile they might have to launch in a public area...absolutely, positively should NOT carry a weapon. That goes for hunters as well.
If they have any moral questions about taking human life with that weapon, they are a disarm waiting to happen and they should absolutely not carry that weapon. Including edged and impact weapons for self-defense, they become a liability to everyone around them because they lack the determination to use those weapons and they are carrying them as talismans or as threats against potential violence. Weapons are not for threatening, especially in the realm of the Citizen. Police can threaten with them and it's legal for them to do so. A police officer can walk up to your vehicle and place his hand on the butt of his duty weapon because he doesn't know what he is going to encounter when confronting you...a Citizen cannot necessarily conduct themselves in public in the same way with a handgun or it's
brandishing.
...
