News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

You're supposed to have completed avalanche safety training and be equipped with an avalanche beacon when travelling/skiing the backcountry.

Most avalanche deaths are due to a lack of either or both.

And some people who take avalanche safety training are just cocky bastards and don't pay attention to conditions like they were taught to.
 
Northern Light said:
Finally, I would really like to see an education/training based EI benefit.

You would need to work for longer to qualify.

But you would be eligible for up to 2-years for retraining/upgrading, if your skills are deemed obsolete.

In that case, I would be ok w/75% income replacement for the entire 2-year term (if that's what the education program required)
Click to expand...

I would have found that incredibly useful.

I have been doing condominium security for the past decade but was let go from Condominium Management before completing the required courses. I looked into Second Careers to change my field and become a more productive member of society but was told that even though I was on EI if I was not laid off or terminated due to restructuring I could not qualify.

I would gladly have become completed the condo management courses but being off work I could not afford to go back to school despite wanting to. I had no issues going back to school and wanted to in order to get a better job. The problem I had was that being on EI means I cannot afford to go to school.
 
It would appear we are finally going to see some gun control legislation...................that's good

www.theglobeandmail.com

Trudeau government poised to introduce new gun-control legislation

The long-promised bill would flesh out last spring’s ban of many firearms, propose stricter storage provisions and target gun smuggling
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com

On the downside, it appears to accomplish almost nothing.

Aside from loopholes that will allow people to retain weapons that the government has made illegal...........

There appears to be no move to restrict hand gun ownership further, nor to cap the number of firearms any one person can legally own at one time.

The latter is key to containing both straw-man purchases (where a legal license holder purchases weapons for those with no legal right to own them); and also large-scale gun theft.
 
Northern Light said:
On the downside, it appears to accomplish almost nothing.
Click to expand...
What if the government decided to quite the irrational, illogical, inhumane, and wasteful "war on drugs (and reason)" and used the resources wasted on that particular moralistic misadventure to clamp down on gun crime, including smuggling?

Nah, let's keep arresting people for enjoying drugs not named alcohol.


Northern Light said:
There appears to be no move to restrict hand gun ownership further, nor to cap the number of firearms any one person can legally own at one time.
Click to expand...
What's a maximum number of guns one can own that 's been bandied about, if any?

I only own two rifles, myself, but that's because they're for very differnt uses. And I don't even own a shotgun, which is for another use from those two entirely.

Just curious, because I sure as hell hope the intelligentsia aren't throwing around numbers under 5.
 
SunriseChampion said:
What if the government decided to quite the irrational, illogical, inhumane, and wasteful "war on drugs (and reason)" and used the resources wasted on that particular moralistic misadventure to clamp down on gun crime, including smuggling?

Nah, let's keep arresting people for enjoying drugs not named alcohol.



What's a maximum number of guns one can own that 's been bandied about, if any?

I only own two rifles, myself, but that's because they're for very differnt uses. And I don't even own a shotgun, which is for another use from those two entirely.

Just curious, because I sure as hell hope the intelligentsia aren't throwing around numbers under 5.
Click to expand...

You know we agree on the drugs question; at minimum, I support decriminalization of possession; and I would prefer legalization, with a scientific basis, looking at appropriate dosages for both medicinal and recreational purposes.

****

I was more interested in the handguns side; though something purchasing 40 guns of any description is a matter of concern.

I'd be happy with a cap of 5.

The object being to prevent straw purchases primarily; but also prohibit people assembling an arsenal that suggests they want a military engagement.

In respect of the above, there are a few stories that caught my attention about this; here's one: https://edmontonjournal.com/news/lo...-addiction-sentenced-to-eight-years-in-prison

The police caught this fellow, but it would have been easier to reduce the crime-gun supply had he simply run up against a cap.
 
karledice said:
I really have no trust in Trudeau
Click to expand...

Whilst I find your take on the vaccination rate "disaster" to be just more plague hysteria, we sure can agree on this^^^^^^.

Trudeau's a chump and a half.


130 countries in the world haven't vaccinated a single person and you want to cry about our "dismal" vaccination rates? How many of those countries won't even have a sizable proportion vaccinated by this time next year?

The first world problems of people here moaning about the vaccination rate is pathetic. Get a grip on reality.

Our lame-o government has even gone so far in pandering to you entitled whingers by taking vaccines out of COVAX which, sure, technically we're contractually entitled to, but ethically have dropped any pretense of being decent human beings by diverting supply from poorer countries.

Stealing from the poor to give to entitled jokers. :rolleyes:
It's embarrassing.
 
Northern Light said:
I'd be happy with a cap of 5.
Click to expand...

That's a reasonable number.

One small gauge rifle.
One large gauge rifle.
One shotgun.
One handgun.
One........something fun that hasn't been banned yet.

Hey, still ready for military conflict with that set up. :p

But, for sure, for hunting, 3 is enough. Small, large, and shotgun.
 
SunriseChampion said:
That's a reasonable number.

One small gauge rifle.
One large gauge rifle.
One shotgun.
One handgun.
One........something fun that hasn't been banned yet.

Hey, still ready for military conflict with that set up. :p

But, for sure, for hunting, 3 is enough. Small, large, and shotgun.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that I buy that there's a case for private handgun ownership.

But in the absence of a move to outlaw it, I'd be satisfied with actions that reduce the prevalence and in turn, reduce shootings and murders somewhat.

I'm personally fine w/hunting (for food, not sport); though I'm rather sure an awful lot of people own rifles and shotguns who never take down a buck in order to make Venison stew.
 
Last edited:
Northern Light said:
I'm not sure that I buy that there's a case for private handgun ownership.
Click to expand...
I'm not a fan of handguns myself. Don't serve a purpose in my life.

Northern Light said:
I'm personally fine w/hunting (for food, not sport); though I'm rather sure an awful lot of people own rifles and shotguns who never take down a buck in order to make Venison stew.
Click to expand...
It's been some time since I've shot mine off. The last few animals I've killed were on a farm using bare hands and/or a knife....now THAT would be a gangster hunting technique!

Never even hunted deer. Just moose and small game....but for small game you can get super lazy and just trap them. :D
 
Northern Light said:
It would appear we are finally going to see some gun control legislation...................that's good

www.theglobeandmail.com

Trudeau government poised to introduce new gun-control legislation

The long-promised bill would flesh out last spring’s ban of many firearms, propose stricter storage provisions and target gun smuggling
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com

On the downside, it appears to accomplish almost nothing.

Aside from loopholes that will allow people to retain weapons that the government has made illegal...........

There appears to be no move to restrict hand gun ownership further, nor to cap the number of firearms any one person can legally own at one time.

The latter is key to containing both straw-man purchases (where a legal license holder purchases weapons for those with no legal right to own them); and also large-scale gun theft.
Click to expand...

Is it just my impression, or is this an ongoing theme with this government - a smoke and mirrors approach, prioritizing style over substance, giving the appearance of doing something without actually including the necessary legislative "meat" to do so?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top