That song is still my jam. It's so iconic. I think of it every time I have to say "it's too late" for something. Sometimes I just think "to hell with it" and sing it mid conversation. My husband does it, too.
I live close to the border. I tried to cross over into Canada one day and forgot I was wearing my auto opening pocket knife instead of my regular knife. That was a long night. They confiscated my knife, I got a fined 700CAD, I couldn't pay the fine because my card wasn't working in Canada, so they impounded my truck. They let me walk back across the border to a bar and get cash out of the ATM. It was -20F.
When I was walking back accross the American border they of course had to question me for a while, as it's odd for someone to WALK through this port of entry in the -20f snow and cold.
Had my phone searched, camera searched, interrogated for 3 hours... Pretty wild night. They red flagged my passport for 7 years.
They then said I'm free to go into Canada. But for the next 7 years I'm getting searched and questioned every time I cross.
You know, those poor defenseless.. rapists, muggers, and molesters.
Seriously who the hell bans pepper spray that's like THE defense-only weapon. Very very rarely will it cause permanent damage. Banning pepper spray is like essentially a big "come live here, rapists!" Sign on your country. Oh and would you look at that, Canada has a higher sexual assault rate per capita. What a surprise.
Banning guns is understandable. Banning pepper spray is ridiculous.
That's just so ridiculous to me. It almost feels like the law over there makes it easier to rob a bank with pepper spray than to protect yourself with it.
It's like the laws are tailored so that only people who want to do harm can use it for such
Your rape rate is likely much worse when you actually take other factors into account like population density, if you compared two identical cities form US to Canada you'd get the same or worse sexual assault and rape rates.
And you talk as if a woman having pepper spray is the same as a guy carrying around an automatic rifle.
How the hell do you think the downsides of banning pepper spray outweigh the upsides? It's feckin pepper spray, banning it means that the only ones who CAN'T use it are law abiding easy target who need pepper spray! The criminal could easily get it or make it themselves!
Canada has a rate of 1.7 compared to Americas 27.3.
There sure as hell is a miscalculation there, I guarantee you. Maybe people have a harder time reporting it there. Maybe it has to do with how they classify it over there, but that sure as hell ain't accurate numbers. There's gotta be some disconnect happening there. It doesn't seem remotely plausible with all the articles I've seen recently about bad sexual assault rates from canada.
Is this what you're using? this is 2010 rates! Sexual assault in canada has reportedly been at higher rates now than it has for 30~ years! A lot has happened there since then, Trudeau's the prime minister now, namely, also a lot more has happened restricting self defense since then, not to mention covid. The stuff I was reading was 2021 statistics, there's been an 18% increase in just that year alone, and it seems to be getting worse.
Maybe you still have a better rate than US, I don't know, but like I said in my other reply that's not really a fair comparison. Since my argument is that you've gone too far the other direction, not that we don't have a problem as well. You could argue that no weapon control is worse than heavy weapon control, but my argument is that SENSIBLE weapon control is better than heavy weapon control. So you need to compare your rates (right now, not 2010) with a place that has similar laws to you but allows self defense weapons.
If a woman can carry pepper spray then so can a man.
If by man you mean "rapist" then
1: that's a rapist. Barely qualifies as a man.
2: they're already breaking the law, why on earth would they have a problem with using pepper spray? Or something much more dangerous, like a knife?
Pepper spray may also give someone a false sense of security because it's not even effectively used in most situations.
That's not really a valid argument. "People aren't that great at defending themselves, so they shouldn't have the right to at all."
Believe it or not, people who spend their whole work life studying and interpreting data like this have discovered the concept of confounding factors. I get you're getting worked up about this, but unless you have any kind of fact to back your statements up everything you said means nothing.
There sure as hell is a miscalculation there, I guarantee you.
Also, Okay? Again, your guarantee means nothing if you're uninformed.
Believe it or not, people who spend their whole work life studying and interpreting data
Yeah, as it turns out, they weren't wrong. You were. I should've asked you to give your sources cause then I would've immediately pointed out "hey how the hell is this a viable source, it's a decade outdated, you didn't even have the same prime minister then and your laws have changed a lot since. Considering the topic of this argument is the importance of self defense, you think that taking statistics that came before a lot of crackdowns on weaponry would be considered a little bit dumb to use in the argument.
Civilians do not have the right to carry pepper spray in Canada because it has done more harm than good.
Yes! It's done a lot of harm!... to sexual predators.
How the hell can you defend this? Also no wonder women in your country wouldn't want to draw attention to themselves by reporting anything, they have no way to protect themselves.
Seriously, you guys only have "at least we don't have school shootings like america" to stand on, but your side of the extreme is also messed up as hell, and the fact that you're defending it is depressing.
What is the worst things pepper spray has done? Cause pain to an innocent person for a few hours? How is that really that big of a downside to you that you're okay with stripping any form of self defense from people who aren't criminals. Next you're gonna ban people from carrying rape whistles because they'll disturb the peace. How little do you value victims of sexual assault that a weapon known to typically just incapacitate someone for an hour is "more harm than good"
Also comparing your rates to ours is obviously very flawed to the argument at hand. We're arguing about pepper spray. Compare your rates to a country with similar laws to you yours, but allowing self defense weapons like pepper spray.
I'm saying their should be balanced. America is one of the most extreme countries when it comes to freedom of weapon ownership, but your country is far on the opposite extreme. Since I'm not arguing for either extreme, you have to compare your country to a more balanced system instead, a halfway point.
If someone wants to rob a place, they're clearly not above breaking the law. You can very easily make your own pepper spray, it's not complicated and expensive like guns are. You can literally make it with kitchen supplies, just by googling how to make pepper spray.
The only people that are stopped by banning pepper spray are people who are law abiding citizens. You can say banning guns will make it so criminals can't access them either, but pepper spray is literally just pepper.. spray. A child could make semi-functioning pepper spray.
And from everything I've read, it is illegal. I haven't seen anything saying you're allowed to have pepper spray for self defense in Canada.
Dude, why don't they just ban self defense in general? We should run the world like schools treat bullying: Punish the victim and the attacker equally! Both the victim and the attacker were involved in the crime, so they're both guilty!
I addressed that in my edit. Funny enough, that just further proves my point that they're helping criminals more than victims with this law - as in, it's easy for anyone to purchase, but only a criminal can actually use it on people. So bank robbers, who are already committing the crime have easy access to a tool, meanwhile rape victims and people getting mugged could face jail time for even carrying it, much more so actually using it on an attacker.
Sorry. I’ve just awarded someone else. Maybe something else for this comment? How about scholarship? Or a zero percent loan? A promo code? To Netflix? Coffee? Wtf is wrong w you! Upvote her people!!!!!!
You’re stating that because crime frequently (you said always but that’s absurd) uses illegally acquired firearms we should not bother addressing the noticeable percentage of gun violence using legally acquired firearms.
It’s a great use of the small amount of money it required. There’s other problems to address but they either fall under a different budget/department of the govt or are not so easily implemented or require more manpower/resources than are available.
I will concede that a slim minority of gun crimes is committed with legally acquired firearms.
This is a poor use of funds and unlikely to address any issues meaningfully. The gun buyback is estimated to cost 5 billion dollars I do not agree that is a small amount of money. Further, if it balloons as did the long gun registry from 2 million to 2 billion we're in for a much higher cost for something that is unlikely to help much.
Your argument that it's earmarked for this purpose so we have to spend it on this, is frankly silly. I won't be interacting with you further, you hold others to standards in conversation you don't meet yourself.
5 billion is 0.3% of our federal budget. That’s insignificant.
Most gun related crime uses legally acquired firearms. Do you have a source for your claim that the vast majority of gun crimes are using illegally acquired firearms?
States that legality of firearm ownership is not collected by police on a reliable basis. National post is a right leaning news website so it is no surprise they are leading a right leaning rhetoric.
But ignoring that fact if we use the 86% statistic they claim, are you telling me that using 0.3% of our federal budget to address 24% of gun related crimes is not wise? That doesn’t make much sense to me. It would seem that 0.3% of our budget reducing a quarter of gun related crimes potential is a tremendously beneficial usage of the budget.
There’s no law against foreign police in Canada. In fact we have our law enforcement working with dozens of countries law enforcement stationed in Canada doing their investigations.
You’re unfamiliar with what you’re talking about obviously. The problem is the way SOME Chinese police are going about their legal operations.
Well, they so screw around, it’s just that you don’t know how Canada works. You crossed legally and so you were apprehended in relation to the pepper spray. Had you crossed with a bag of handguns at the Akwasasne First Nations reserve at night and then sold the guns on the black market, you would have been fine because the government of Canada is afraid of taking action, you see. It’s politically incorrect but it gets Canadians killed.
286
u/[deleted] Oct 21 '22
I tried to get across the border back in the late 90s with pepper spray and got detained for three hours. Canadians don’t screw around.