Translated: You caught my lie, so I will now pivot by saying I did not mean what I meant.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Mon Sep 27, 2021 3:06 pmNope, I said there was one gun for every 8 Australians.
Meanwhile in Australia
-
- Posts: 3657
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:15 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
One gun for every 8 Australians.PartyOf5 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 10:10 amTranslated: You caught my lie, so I will now pivot by saying I did not mean what I meant.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Mon Sep 27, 2021 3:06 pmNope, I said there was one gun for every 8 Australians.
That's not no guns as was suggested.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
the difference in Australia is not about how many guns they have
the law in Australia explicitly states that you cannot use a gun for self defence
because they don't have a constitution of their own, but are rather still under British law, there is no right to self defence
the government in Canada would like to make it this way
but they can't get around the right to "security of the person" in the 1982 Canadian charter
the Jonestown Canada of today would never write the Charter as it did in 1982, but they're stuck with it
the law in Australia explicitly states that you cannot use a gun for self defence
because they don't have a constitution of their own, but are rather still under British law, there is no right to self defence
the government in Canada would like to make it this way
but they can't get around the right to "security of the person" in the 1982 Canadian charter
the Jonestown Canada of today would never write the Charter as it did in 1982, but they're stuck with it
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
in terms of the number of guns per capita fallacy, Canada has a lot of guns, but they are in the hands of relatively few owners
the average Canadian gun enthusiast owns lots of guns, while the average Canadian owns no guns at all
none the less, in terms of a revolution against the Crown of Canada, the flow of guns from the USA would be impossible to stop
the criminal element in Canada is heavily armed with American guns
the Indians are also armed to the teeth with American guns, particularly the Mohawks sitting astride the border
the Government of Canada is not actually capable of staving off a concerted violent insurrection, there's just not enough Mounties to do the job
Canada is 9 million square kilometres of mostly wilderness, there's no way to put down an insurgency on this much terrain
what keeps Canadians in check is the culture, Canadians are anti-American British Victorian nanny police staters by nature
same thing with Australia, except they are much more detached from America and the subversive republican Hurly Burly
the average Canadian gun enthusiast owns lots of guns, while the average Canadian owns no guns at all
none the less, in terms of a revolution against the Crown of Canada, the flow of guns from the USA would be impossible to stop
the criminal element in Canada is heavily armed with American guns
the Indians are also armed to the teeth with American guns, particularly the Mohawks sitting astride the border
the Government of Canada is not actually capable of staving off a concerted violent insurrection, there's just not enough Mounties to do the job
Canada is 9 million square kilometres of mostly wilderness, there's no way to put down an insurgency on this much terrain
what keeps Canadians in check is the culture, Canadians are anti-American British Victorian nanny police staters by nature
same thing with Australia, except they are much more detached from America and the subversive republican Hurly Burly
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
There is a right to self defence. Right up to the use of deadly force if you feel your life is in danger.Smitty-48 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 10:35 amthe difference in Australia is not about how many guns they have
the law in Australia explicitly states that you cannot use a gun for self defence
because they don't have a constitution of their own, but are rather still under British law, there is no right to self defence
the government in Canada would like to make it this way
but they can't get around the right to "security of the person" in the 1982 Canadian charter
the Jonestown Canada of today would never write the Charter as it did in 1982, but they're stuck with it
There is no right to arm yourself for self defence though.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
in Canada the right to self defence automatically includes the right to defend yourself with a gunMontegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 11:18 amThere is a right to self defence. Right up to the use of deadly force if you feel your life is in danger.Smitty-48 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 10:35 amthe difference in Australia is not about how many guns they have
the law in Australia explicitly states that you cannot use a gun for self defence
because they don't have a constitution of their own, but are rather still under British law, there is no right to self defence
the government in Canada would like to make it this way
but they can't get around the right to "security of the person" in the 1982 Canadian charter
the Jonestown Canada of today would never write the Charter as it did in 1982, but they're stuck with it
There is no right to arm yourself for self defence though.
the courts here simply found it "reasonable" that a person would need a gun to defend themselves against a lethal threat
the arguments here in court are not about the gun, but whether the use of force was reasonable in respect to the threat
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
Same here (in your own home) however taking a weapon onto the streets to defend yourself is not considered self defence.Smitty-48 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 11:24 amin Canada the right to self defence automatically includes the right to defend yourself with a gunMontegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 11:18 amThere is a right to self defence. Right up to the use of deadly force if you feel your life is in danger.Smitty-48 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 10:35 amthe difference in Australia is not about how many guns they have
the law in Australia explicitly states that you cannot use a gun for self defence
because they don't have a constitution of their own, but are rather still under British law, there is no right to self defence
the government in Canada would like to make it this way
but they can't get around the right to "security of the person" in the 1982 Canadian charter
the Jonestown Canada of today would never write the Charter as it did in 1982, but they're stuck with it
There is no right to arm yourself for self defence though.
the courts here simply found it "reasonable" that a person would need a gun to defend themselves against a lethal threat
the arguments here in court are not about the gun, but whether the use of force was reasonable in respect to the threat
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 12241
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:04 pm
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
Montegriffo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 28, 2021 11:18 amThere is a right to self defence. Right up to the use of deadly force if you feel your life is in danger.
There is no right to arm yourself for self defence though.
You have a right to a trial ... right on up till you go to jail.
No right for representation in court tho.
lulz
"Hey varmints, don't mess with a guy that's riding a buffalo"
-
- Posts: 12241
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:04 pm
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
"Hear ye, Hear ye,
All Good Britons henceforth are given the right,
to attempt to pummel armed gunmen to death,
in defense of their own lives."
You Brits really know how to pile on those freedoms, man.
Let me tell ya.
"May we use a stick, sire?"
"No!"
All Good Britons henceforth are given the right,
to attempt to pummel armed gunmen to death,
in defense of their own lives."
You Brits really know how to pile on those freedoms, man.
Let me tell ya.
"May we use a stick, sire?"
"No!"
Last edited by DBTrek on Tue Sep 28, 2021 11:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Hey varmints, don't mess with a guy that's riding a buffalo"
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: Meanwhile in Australia
there is even such a thing as a Canadian concealed carry handgun permit
but they are only issued to persons the courts deem to be in imminent danger
but if you are a wife with a deranged ex husband out to kill you, you could actually apply for a concealed carry handgun permit in Canada
most Canadians are not aware of this, the government does not advertise it, so the average Canadian never thinks to apply for one
but they are only issued to persons the courts deem to be in imminent danger
but if you are a wife with a deranged ex husband out to kill you, you could actually apply for a concealed carry handgun permit in Canada
most Canadians are not aware of this, the government does not advertise it, so the average Canadian never thinks to apply for one
Nec Aspera Terrent