PDA

View Full Version : Federal Inmates in Canada allowed shanks for self defense.



INFINOO
7th November 2002, 18:06
Because of a recent case that resulted in a federal inmate "beating the rap for carrying a shank" Federal Inmates in Canada are allowed to carry shanks for self defense :eek:. In a talk radio interveiw on QR 770 talk radio, the president of the gaurds union is very concerned of the implications. No doubt. Last time I checked, free citizens in Canada are not even allowed to carry knives for self defense. Will this "open the door" on carry rights of individuals in Canada on the street? I would think so. Any opinions?

Regards

Gregory Rogalsky
Rogalsky Combatives International
Calgary Alberta Canada

tmanifold
7th November 2002, 21:24
This brings me to a topic I have been thinking of for a long time. I think it is past time for law abiding Canadians to phone, e-mail and write their MPs and show our support for legally carried weapons. I have absolutly no problem with the Government knowing I own weapons but to restrict us from owning or carrying is wrong. I can get a pistol on the street for less than I could buy it in a shop and nobody would know I had it. I am unable to carry equal equipment that the criminals carry. Not only that, I can not take a pistol to the firing range without phoning my local police station and telling them. As if they don't have enough to do already. Let us mobilize and show the goverment we give a damn.

Find your MP here:
http://www.gc.ca/directories/direct_e.html

Jody Holeton
7th November 2002, 23:57
Way to go Manifold!

Fight the good fight and do something about it!

INFINOO
8th November 2002, 00:49
Good point Phil, From what I understand possession of weapons are still banned in federal institations of Canada, However with this case in the books, defending your self with a knife in prison is not?. One a side note federal inmates are now allowed to vote while in jail
.
Manifold: Good luck with your E-mail Campaign.

The fact is in Canada we can already carry knives, not as weapons but as tools.:rolleyes: If you admit your carrying a knife as a weapon to the police you will go straight to jail. But at least there(prison), you can claim to carry a knife for self defense?
Im I missing somthing here? As far as I can tell in this country "No sense makes sense".

"Rights are never given, only taken"


Regards

Gregory Rogalsky
Rogalsky Combatives International
Calgary Alberta Canada

gmellis
8th November 2002, 01:21
For those here that believe that Canada should just outright legalize handguns similar to that of the U.S. (if there are any in this forum?), what are your thoughts on why the U.S. has 14.5 times the rate of murders per 100,000 capita with handguns compared with Canada and 3.5 times the rate of robberies with guns (based on statistics compiled from Centre for Justice Statistics; FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Data, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada Homicide Survey; Research and Statistics Division Department of Justice)? The Firearms Research Unit of the Canadian Firearms Centre also corroborates findings similar to these. Genuinely interested in your opinions on the correlation between Canada's strict gun control laws and gun crime rates compared with the U.S. Cheers.

INFINOO
8th November 2002, 03:27
Greg Ellis: Interesting, do you have the stats on how many times a gun was used to stop a crime and prevent a murder in the USA. If so do you think every incident gets reported to the police?
Secondly do you have stats for murder rate per capita for edged and point based weapons in both countrys?. And thirdly how many times are knives used to stop crime and prevent assualt and murder in both countrys?. Again, do you think every one of these incidences is reported?
As you can tell Im just a little suspicious of stats by the FBI on crime. The fact is many "almost" roberies and assults are never reported.
I for one Im not so sure that it is an safer in the US than in Canada. Its true there are more guns in the states than Canada. But in Canada the knife is "tool of the trade" so to speak. I know in Calgary that we have an alarming number of stabbings for its population, many that are fatal. For instace this weekend some one stabbed a man who happened to be holding a puppy(what kind of sick fu*K would do that?). The EMS on scene reported in the news that because the puppy took the blunt of the blow it probably saved the owners life. The police on scene put the dog out of its misery.
And its not always knives and guns.. This weekend at a local bar, not two blocks from my house, a man was killed by a single punch to the head out side a bar with another man. The man who threw the punch was arrested for assualt and pending further investigation ,murder charges are pending. The 19 victom was a son of a nurse at the hospital where we just had are new baby at.


Regards

Gregory Rogalsky
Rogalsky Combatives International
Calgary Alberta Canada

Jody Holeton
8th November 2002, 03:31
Dear gmellis,

Looking at the same stats an interesting phrase comes to mind, "Too many predators."

Too many people willing to do ANYTHING to get what they want. From Martha Stewart to the crack dealer on 8 mile, its the same mentality. I believe Noam Chomsky writes more specifically about Americas mentality problem (is it a problem?) in his book "Profit Over People" I believe. Let me look it up.

If Americans didn't have guns we would still kill each other and we DO even with tough gun laws. More people with CCWs lower certain types of crime, its like an random IRS audit, if you know you have a high chance of experiencing one, you are less likely to do bad things.

Another thing in America is the whole "No witness, no weapon, no crime bit". Criminals know that if they get caught in America, they are going to a BAD place for a very long time (especially after 3 strikes). Leaving witnesses around is to much of a liability. From robbing a liquor store to whacking your husband, people weigh their own personal worth against the value of human life.

I really believe its an ethical problem than a gun problem in America. Too many predators willing to do ANYTHING for gratification.

gmellis
8th November 2002, 04:20
First off before anyone gets their feathers ruffled, let me state that I am genuinely interested in opinions and evidence of them here and am not looking for a flame war. For those that knee-jerk over this issue, go elsewhere. For everyone else, come one come all and lets have a mature discussion with supporting evidence.


Greg Ellis: Interesting, do you have the stats on how many times a gun was used to stop a crime and prevent a murder in the USA. If so do you think every incident gets reported to the police?
___________________________________________________________________
No. But I would be interested if anyone here knows of any. I must state that, whereas I am working from concrete evidence (which may or may not be argued as reliable with variable degrees of success, but has has no less been conducted using common statistical standards) you are arguing with non-evidence. How does the fact that the statistics don't cover that area of defense with handguns some how discredits their validity? Incidents of non-reporting are moot, because they are not documented and can be inflated or deflated depending on whim to counter concrete evidence. I would also like to ask this question to folks: Would you rather have a criminal and potential victim both disarmed or both armed with handguns? The potential ensuing firefight and its possible effects on surrounding bystanders is a bit disconcerting in my mind. Of course criminals being criminals, they will get a gun if they REALLY want one, but why making it any easier for them to get one? Is the fact that criminals can easily get guns a sign that the poplace needs to be armed or that law enforcement is malfunctioning at some level? And why potentially escalate a situation by having an entire population armed to the teeth? Would this increase people's feelings of safety knowing that people who have not committed any crime or been certifiyied as insane but that are known to be "strange" works in the same office as them and packs heat? Does this really increase people's feelings of safety? I certainly wouldn'T feel comfortable. I would feel like I was in the Wild West. Again, I am not being sarcastic, I want mature responses here. And if having everyone armed is the best defense, should everyone be packing shoulder arms in their offices and in cars, etc?



Secondly do you have stats for murder rate per capita for edged and point based weapons in both countrys?. ____________________________________________________________________
The same statistics quote murder w/o guns (a broad category but..) as 1.8 times higher per 100,000 capita in the U.S. than Canada, with robberies without guns 1.3 times higher in the U.S. than Canada.


And thirdly how many times are knives used to stop crime and prevent assualt and murder in both countrys?
_____________________________________________________________________
Again, I have no stats for that, but am interested if anyone knows of any.


Again, do you think every one of these incidences is reported?
____________________________________________________________________
I don't think much of anything without evidence or reports whose accuracy and vailidity can be tested.


As you can tell Im just a little suspicious of stats by the FBI on crime. The fact is many "almost" roberies and assults are never reported.
____________________________________________________________________
Well, if people posting believe these institutions' stats are bias and skewed without providing testimony or evidence that indicates such, I really don't have a response to that. This argument opens up the Pandora's Box for anyone to discredit the statistics of any institution or individual on whim, and really doesn't further the discussions here. As for "unreportings," does anyone have some sort of evidence or broad nationwide studies on the percentage of crimes that go reported. Like I said, I am not on an agenda here folks, and am trying to flush this gun argument out a bit, but I need something concrete to work with and not anecdotes.


Jody,
I agree. Americans would kill each other somehow. But doesn'T having access to automatic and other rapid-fire weapons increase the radius of destruction and speed at which we can do so. Death by knife is surely heinous, but how many people can a whacko kill with a knife in one minute, verses someone with a berreta or automatic rifle. The scale of the destruction is the first thing that comes to mind. Any thoughts?

Jody Holeton
8th November 2002, 05:04
Dear Greg,

Yes, lets try and stay away from flame wars.

PEOPLE (not just Americans)WILL ALWAYS try and kill each other over resources and work a system. Its the nature of the beast.

You want to kill alot of people? Guns dont cut the destructive power of a good bomb. Some fertilizer, a basic timer WABOOOM! How about going after a water supply? Want some ecstacy with your morning coffee?
How many people died from a couple of moonies with box-cutters on 9/11?

I am talking about the mentallity that allows people to be overlooked like chattel. Knife, gun, mastercard, water could all be used (and are) to kill you in that mentality.

Its not the guns I'm worried about.

gmellis
8th November 2002, 05:45
Jody,
Excellent post. I wholeheartedly agree. The root of murder and destruction lies in competing interests that prize the property and other valuables of the "other guy" over that "other guy's" inherent right to hold onto to those things or just simply continue using them like always (Native Americans come to mind here; no ownership mentality of land mid you), or wanting to make others hurt as much as that person is hurting inside due to circumstances. A very far-reaching and ubiquitous problem that has plagued our species for ages, and one that warrants us humans reflecting on our own value systems and ways of viewing objects and people around us (EX: the inherent worth of other people, animals and things or just a resource for exploitation). However, it is difficult to apply them in a policy fashion in dealing with the concrete issue of guns and murders. Your ideas are actually worthy of an entire new post in its self, given the magnitude of the phenomenon.

Senjojutsu
8th November 2002, 10:24
(Native Americans come to mind here; no ownership mentality of land mid you),


The Iroquis Confederacy, The Aztec, the Incas to name just a few major Native American tribes had extensive land empires when the Europeans made contact with them.

Any culture, on any continent, in any historical time period did not get and maintain its land empire through PEACE, LOVE and BROTHERLY UNDERSTANDING.

A little more historical reading, a little less current Hollywood orthodoxy, is a good thing.

gmellis
8th November 2002, 13:57
A little more historical reading, a little less current Hollywood orthodoxy, is a good thing.
__________________________________________________________________
Thanks for the insult. I am well aware that there were non-nomadic tribes that settled in specific locations and fought over land, I am also aware that there were nomadic tribes that fought over hunting territories. The reference "Native Americans" was a general reference not meant to blanket the whole, quite diverse group. I'll be sure to categorize my statements to the finest minutae with footnotes and cross my Ts next time, lest I seem too Hollywoodish and UN-E-JYU-K'td. Again, thanks for the curt, nonproductive response. Feel free to contribute more of those gems when the mood hits you.

Any culture, on any continent, in any historical time period did not get and maintain its land empire through PEACE, LOVE and BROTHERLY UNDERSTANDING.
____________________________________________________________________
Again. Another quite topical and most illuminating statement on the pros and cons of gun control! Touche again. I should just give the floor to you and let you take over these discussions given your talent for keeping the posts productive and gentlemanly.

INFINOO
8th November 2002, 17:58
Greg Ellis: Wild west indeed. In the Calgary local news today, a home envasion was stopped when the attacker was stabbed by a twelve year old child defending himself and his single mom who also home. The child is being reported as a hero.
Around these parts, we say that the bad guy in this story got a little taste of "western justice".
Jody Holeton: You made some good points, timely as well. It was in the news yesterday at a security summit in Calgary that pre 911, a power company that provides power to a million albertens was being spyed on by "Foreign powers" A spokes person was quoted in the news. "if are power goes out, we got no hospitals , no communication" not to mention "people frezzing in the dark in the winter" my quote. The potential implications are scary.
Sharp Phil: Well said. Your last post reminds me of couple of sayings
"One sword keeps another in its sheath".
and another one I saw on a bumpersticker while visiting the US. "Guns dont kill people, I do"

Regards

Gregory Rogalsky
Rogalsky Combatives International
Calgary Alberta Canada

Senjojutsu
8th November 2002, 19:35
Greg Ellis, upon further review if my initial response was somewhat curt - then my apologies to you. Since you had specifically requested not to have a flame war on a emotionally charged subject.

Unfortunately similar to the voluminous “Society and Tax” thread - this thread will most likely be broken down between two camps – I think Sharp Phil illustrates one viewpoint:


Once again for the slow readers: Violence is culturally determined. It is not created by the availability of weapons. Weapons are inanimate objects that do nothing by themselves. People have volition and people commit crime.

My contributory items toward this debate is to consider that although much has been researched, documented, and quantified with statistics on the nature of violence in America - with guns providing a far greater degree of lethality.

However stepping up a level - please consider how the American culture emphasizes individualistic traits – so would not violence in America also take a similar pattern?

Violence in various cultures can be manifested differently – not directly translating into random street crimes.

Other cultures examples of violence, the “honor killings” for marital infidelity in Latin cultures, or vendetta based bloodshed between extended family units in others.

Group dynamics and violence can be seen in other examples, where it is not the individual, but a collective action of violence that occurs:

     1) British soccer fans holiganism and rioting
     2) French students rioting on the Left Bank for whatever political cause
     3) Hindu versus Muslim mob rioting in India - where hundreds are often hacked and burned to death before order is restored.

Normally left out in this debate of comparing a country’s violence level to another country is the selected government’s violence onto its own citizens - how free a society is from its own government:

     1) Where local government corruption is so endemic government officials basically displace organized crime - exhorting kickbacks from legitimate businesses and populace.
     2) The selected disappearances (murders) by South America governments of suspected leftists.
     3) The millions of others who died under Communism oppression in the 20th century (who as the bumper stickers say – governments which are firm proponents of gun control).

To answer a specific inquiry by Greg Ellis had made, the American NRA (National Rifle Association) has for years highlighted examples of armed citizenry preventing criminal acts and personal injury by the use or display of firearms – unfortunately that may be too anecdotal and self-serving for some.

Then there is the example of the (heavily armed) Swiss citizenry - but that will take another post.

tmanifold
8th November 2002, 23:04
First I am not advocating the ownership of assualt rifles or machine guns. Just pistols or hunting rifles. In particualar the lawfully concealed pistol.
I will not get into the dangers of a lawless society( or one in which the rule of law is not respected). Thomas Hobbes covers that quite well in Leviatian. He states that every reasonable person should take the necassary steps to defend himself. He also points out the role of the state is to do that for you. I think it is obvious at this point hat the state can not protect you at all times. The responsiblity is on the individual to protect himself from internal dangers. In that case, the state should allow each individual the tools to do so.

Remember that criminals do not go to the local gun store to find their weapons. They find them on the street for considerably less then you or I could buy them for. If one was allowed to carry a legally obtained pistol the chances of that person using them for a crime are virtually nil. Only idiots would do so and contary to popluar belief most criminals are not idiots.

I am advocating a legal, responsible and monitiored CCW program. One which would require a criminal record check possible a course and a license. To me that seems resonable.

Sochin
8th November 2002, 23:34
Going all the way back to the very first post (pre- gun control debate):

Greg wrote" Last time I checked, free citizens in Canada are not even allowed to carry knives for self defense."

Canadians have the right, by law, to carry a weapon for self defense if:

1. it is not concealed

2. you do not accost, impede or beg from anybody while carrying it and

3. it is not a restricted or prohibited weapon by law

I can look up the pertinant case law and CCC section if you want.

What some municipalities do do is to regulate the length of a knife for a legal carry in their jurisdiction.

gmellis
9th November 2002, 00:42
John,
My apologies for snapping. I was in a particularly bad mood at the time. THAT'S the type of response I was looking for! Lots of food for thought in that one. Thank you. You say the Swiss are heavily armed? And one doesn't think of Switzerland when they think of drive-bys now do they? I wonder if we have any Swiss people reading this post who could shed some light here? If that's the case, that could very well lend some credence to the culture of violence theory then. Thanks for the info. I should check out the NRA site I suppose and see what kind of data they have compiled or what rebuttals they have of crime stats to to be better educated. Again, sorry for the fireballs from my eyes.

Senjojutsu
9th November 2002, 09:27
Some tibbits of Swiss life, guns, and violence (no chocolates however).   :(

Switzerland had a population around 7.3 million in 2001.


One of the most famous, and ancient militia are the Swiss milita. It is not widely recognized, but Switzerland is the most militaristic society on Earth, maintaining more than twice as many active-duty soldiers per capita as the next-most-militaristic country, Israel, and a trained, mobilizable reserve militia of 36% of the total population. Famously, militia members keep their rifles and uniforms in their house for immediate mobilization. Swiss military doctrines are arranged in peculiar ways to make this organization effective.


All of Swiss society celebrates shooting, and skill with the rifle. For example, each year Zurich shuts down a whole day for its "Boys' Shooting Festival." Children, male and female, as young as eight and as old as seventeen compete in riflery. It is a traditional holiday.


Switzerland is currently reorganizing its military into a smaller, less expensive elite professional military. The country is reluctant to give up the power and romance of a large militia, but recognizes that modern weapons may well make a large group of riflemen much less effective than it once was.

However, conservative politicians have threatened to challenge the reform in a nationwide vote. They argue the proposals are a first step towards fully professional armed forces. Sceptical of increased military cooperation with other countries, the opponents also say the role of the army should be limited to prevention and protection in Switzerland. According to Ulrich Schlüer, a member of parliament for the right wing Swiss People’s Party, the reforms would jeopardise the Swiss militia army system.

“This new system is no longer a Swiss system, but a NATO system. But we want to have an independent army for our own purposes,” Schlüer told swissinfo



The U.N. study omits mention of Switzerland, which is awash in guns and has substantially lower murder and robbery rates than England, where most guns are banned.

Here are the figures: The Swiss Federal Police Office reports that in 1997 there were 87 intentional homicides and 102 attempted homicides in the entire country.

Some 91 of these 189 murders and attempts involved firearms. With its population of seven million (including 1.2 million foreigners), Switzerland had a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000. Almost half of these crimes were committed by non-resident foreigners, whom locals call "criminal tourists."