Yes, unfortunately when push comes to shove, environmentalism will often be pushed aside to level the playing field.

Carney’s reliance on fossil fuels does stick out as somewhat against his own book, Values. This is all speculation, but my theory for the reliance on fossil fuels is that it has a history of econimcally strengthening nations (at least if we ignore pollution), and has historically proven to be a valuable and desired resource globally and domestically. Given he is navigating the biggest economic shift Canada has seen in decades, fossil fuels look like a safe, but not neccesarily the right choice.

I watched a few interviews with Carney throughout the election to get an idea of who he is and the policies he might support. One detail that really stuck out to me is he was a goaltender when he played hockey. Canada has a big mean offensive oaf taking shots at it, and Canada elects a goalie as a response.

Biyadi almost sounds Italian

You shouldn’t be returning fire without confirming your target and what is beyond it in that situation. Of course many people will end up following instincts first and think later, especially in dangerous situations. The best option would be having an escape route, or multiple, and if you’re paranoid or a likely target, practice using them often. Returning fire should be a no other reasonable options route.

The problem won’t be the number of guns but the number of capable hands that can use them.

People on here bang the insurgency drum as if we will put up the same fight as vietnam or the middle east. I love the sentiment, but Canada doesnt have the same number of guns nor the same desperate population as those conflicts did. We glorify the resistance fighting but seem to forget those wars saw several resistance fighters killed per US casuality. And given Americas track record, succesful insurgent missions will be met with air strikes and civilian casualities. If invasion happens by all means we should resist, but prioirty absolutely should be preventing invasion in the first place.

Unfortunately the NSA has probably seen your comment and you will be abducted or bombed before their invasion truly begins.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I still thinks Justin’s response could have been better than ignore the issue and leave the country. Addressing the protesters doesn’t mean giving them exactly what they want. By not even meeting with them, Justin strengthened their movement IMO.

He didn’t resign at that point, he instead left the country and wouldn’t even address the protesters.

Instead our government is focusing on taking guns away from legal owners. The whole gun buyback program at the very least should have been paused once threats to our sovereignty started.

I did not notice a drop in officer presence or radar traps in my area while cameras were operating. Sometimes I would even see radar not far from the camera. If anything the culture of cops won’t pull you for 20 over or less is the bigger issue.

My area used all the funds generated by the speed cameras to fund roadway safety projects like speed bumps, flexible lane narrowing bollards, and other traffic calming techniques.

Given the current treatment the USA is giving their own people, i could see them implementing nationwide policies to root out Canadian resistance and provide incentives for people to rat out insurgents. I’m not certain decades of sabotage would happen, especially considering how similar their cultures are. I’d imagine most insurgents behavior would stop with 5 years of the surrender and the vast majority of Canadians would accept their new reality. Any remaining incidents would be so infrequent the other violences inherrent in america would drown them out.

Greenland would be a valuable asset for either a military invasion or a trade embargo on Canada.

I think it entirely depends on how agressively the USA wants Canada. The wars in the middle east would look like a play date compared to a legitmate aggressive invasion of a neighbouring nation. I fully believe the Canadians would put up a damn good fight and insurrection, but life wouldn’t be pleasant for many and as we’ve seen from America’s track record, many non combatants will be caught in the crossfire.

You can call the cheif firearms office and report individuals you belive to be unfit to safely own guns. The authorities will typically follow up with various interviews, maybe a compliance check for storage etc and could take their guns and lisence away if they deem him unfit to own them.

For many places, this could cut to costs of a lot down where places are allowing lot splitting. I’ve noticed its common for a family to build a smaller house in the backyard, where zoning laws allow it, so that their kids/parents/in-laws/best friend can live there.

Is it as great as having your own lot? Probably not but it would cut down a lot of costs, keeps you close to family and beats the hell out of living in the basement instead.