guns have done that for centuries

[GreaTOne_65]

Stick your freephoneupyourass.

Boy, you have no idea how much it tickles me to know, I have gotten under your skin!! HA HA HA!!

[Nebrfarmr]

I have been poking around the web, looking at stats, and I seem to be seeing a trend of sorts, involving violence in general, as well as firearm violence.

Just as an example:

Canada has less of a problem than the US, which has less of a problem than Mexico.

Well, I think we all can agree that in Mexico, the inmates have all but taken over the asylum, as far as the government is concerned.   We all know there is widespread corruption in all levels of Mexican government.

Now, following that trend, if you look at the 'most violent' places in the US, from my perspective, it seems that a lot of the more dangerous places to live, also have either a dysfunctional, or even corrupt government (State or city government within the US).

From what little I know about Canada, they seem to have (or at least had just a few years ago) a government that the Canadians I know, considered less corrupt than the US government.

If you get a list of the countries with the most gun violence, there are quite a few countreis worse than the US, but as a rule, they are also the ones with governments I would not trust.   With Congressional approval going down to 'worse than Cockroaches" (really, I can prove it) and violence escalating, are the two conneced?

Does an uncertain government, cause more anxiety, among the populace?
Does a more anxious/violence prone populace, elect a government more prone to corruption, or percieved corruption?

Can't prove any of this, just some random thoughts that popped into my head over the course of the day.

[Canuck_2]

---

@Red Steele wrote:

What do you think the odds of that happening would have been without the example of the American Revolution?

Not to argue with you...just to stimulate some of those brain neurons.

---

Well I guess we will never know but it did happen in many other countries besides Canada.

Maybe one area revolting caused some changes but maybe those changes would have happened any way OR maybe more peaceful ways coud have been found that would not have uprooted so many and caused the bloodshed.

Good to think of all the options and the way history plays out.

[Canuck_2]

---

@Samnospam wrote:
You're still live under a monarch and tell the Ojibwa, cree and various Algonquin tribes you didn't take your home from anyone.

---

It really seems to rankle you that we have a constitutional monarchy government but it does seem to work for the most part.

I could envision some changes but they are always hard to make. Everyone is always afraid of something different even if the changes look like they would make things better.

And if you wish to discuss First Nations you should acknowledge that many of them now live in Canada because they were persecuted and massacred in your country as genocide was inflicted on them so fled north for the safety of the British crown.

Read up on history and see what your countrymen did to natives through the years. slaughtering all they could find women and children included. Burning their homes and food stores going into winter forcing those who escaped to freeze and starve in the snow.

If you think Canada has issues to deal with how the first nations people were treated here then your country has more to answer to.

[Canuck_2]

---

@Nebrfarmr wrote:

I have been poking around the web, looking at stats, and I seem to be seeing a trend of sorts, involving violence in general, as well as firearm violence.

Just as an example:

Canada has less of a problem than the US, which has less of a problem than Mexico.

Well, I think we all can agree that in Mexico, the inmates have all but taken over the asylum, as far as the government is concerned.   We all know there is widespread corruption in all levels of Mexican government.

Now, following that trend, if you look at the 'most violent' places in the US, from my perspective, it seems that a lot of the more dangerous places to live, also have either a dysfunctional, or even corrupt government (State or city government within the US).

From what little I know about Canada, they seem to have (or at least had just a few years ago) a government that the Canadians I know, considered less corrupt than the US government.

If you get a list of the countries with the most gun violence, there are quite a few countreis worse than the US, but as a rule, they are also the ones with governments I would not trust.   With Congressional approval going down to 'worse than Cockroaches" (really, I can prove it) and violence escalating, are the two conneced?

Does an uncertain government, cause more anxiety, among the populace?
Does a more anxious/violence prone populace, elect a government more prone to corruption, or percieved corruption?

Can't prove any of this, just some random thoughts that popped into my head over the course of the day.

---

I have stated before that there is something different in your culture/country than Canada since our homicide rates are so much lower than yours.

We watch much the same media, except we do have the government subsidized CBC. Other media outlets show mostly US programs and lots of clips from US news.

Kids play the same video games, use the same internet.

So what is different?

Government OR the availability of guns and the gun culture that your country has, where guns are worshipped and admired by so many.

Maybe it is just the royal family that rules us, according to Sam.

[Nebrfarmr]

Are you saying, that if someone was bent on getting a gun in Canada, they couldn't do it?

Didn't you comment once, about two cities, just a little ways apart, one in Canada, the other in the US, with far different homocide rates? 

Was one of those cities Detroit?

If it was, did you know that Detroit has some of the more onerous gun control laws in the US?

Also,simple gun ownership doesn't explain Mexico, which has far, far tighter restrictions on gun ownership than the USA does.

This article gives a quick rundown on the requirements for Detroit.  It is kind of biased in its conclusions, but as far as I know, gives the gun ownership requirements accurately.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/22835/gun-control-facts-detroit-crime-rate-is-the-result-of-gun-co...

I know the comment will be, that guns can easily be 'smuggled' into Detroit illegally, but really, just how hard would it be, to smuggle one across the border North?

However, going with my theme, Detroit is known to be run by a fairly corrupt city government.  I know next to nothing about how the city in Canada is run.  Is it known for being well-run?

[Canuck_2]

I have no opinion on the governing of Windsor or Detroit.

Maybe that is the difference in our cultures, that we have good governance and you have poor governance.

I tend to think that is too easy an excuse.

Having gun controls in one city or even one state will have minimal impact on the availability of guns. All a person has to do is drive across the municiple or state border and come home with the desired gun, no border control at all.

Getting a gun, especially a hand gun, in Canada is more difficult because they are controlled across the country so you have to smuggle it across an international border with guards that stop and chat with every vehical/person entering.

Yes guns are smuggled across the border and that is an ongoing problem and source of illegal guns in Canada but there is a difference in who wants to own a gun in the 2 countries.

There just is not a very big or vocal group in this country trying to own lots of guns.

Is it because we have good government?

I am thinking it is as likely to be because we are as Sam keeps insisting 'ruled by one of those addled Queens'.

Think that could be a proven difference and would apply to several other countries that are 'ruled' by the same Queen too.

[Faust100F]

I would like to live in a country, where the neighbor protected our ass, purchased our oil, and relieved us of all the costs that are associated with a democratic society.  I think the winners during the Revolution were the Loyalists who had their ass exiled to Canada.  Let us ban auto imports from Eastern Canada and see what happens to that tooth pick ecoonomy.

 The only part of Canada of any value to the United States are the Western Porvinces where most of the grain and oil is produced, those people are the "real" Canadians.  

The Eastern Half of Canada, belongs to the Frogs and the muslims, if we were to ban Canadian film makers from the U.S. Eastern Canada would return to what it originally was, "Polar Bear Commons."

 I am tired of the US protecting Canadian and Mexican asses with our blood and treasure.   It is time for them to grow up and become a nation, rather than stay the Stepchildren of the United States.  Just sayin . . .    John

[Samnospam]

None the less your homes were taken from someone else.

And yes I find the. concept of a monarchy extremely offensive.  

[Samnospam]

The french treated the north american natives better than any other European group, but the British were real pricks to them. The Brits used them against the americans, equiped them and promise to help them get their lands back. Then as soon as things would get hot the Brits would run and leave the natives to suffer. At fallen timbers the Brits promised to fight with them then locked the gates of the fort when the natives sought refuge. Tecumseh himself was killed because the British ran from a fight.