DescentBB

Keep in mind, this is from 2012.

But is there really a culture in Michigan that if someone even looks at you, it's a potential situation? I mean sure, it might look a bit like the old west when it's in full swing, but that's where the similarities end.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/op ... story.html

Anyone who even has a passing knowledge of Canada knows we don't approach people like that to 'cause harm'. Especially in Alberta, and especially during the biggest rodeo in the world.

Our culture is none of your business.

At least we don't condone the rape of children. (a reference to the child rape case, not stupid Canada)

So butt out.

Edited due to a misunderstanding.

Spidey wrote:Our culture is none of your business.

At least we don't condone the rape of children.

So butt out.

your culture is very much our business when it's pushed on us by this person.

now. are you going to address the article, or take pot shots at me?

Tell that person to go ★■◆● off.

Pushed on you, eh? (like how I said "eh?"--I'm working on my Canadian )

I think this is a ridiculous article, because no one who wasn't there in the middle of it is in a position to comment on the nature of the encounter.

I don't see any reason to pin this on Michigan residents or gun owners as a whole. Some people are unfriendly or paranoid. I've passed people who are uncomfortable in response to a friendly "hello ", and sometimes people just refuse to acknowledge you. Maybe it's due to time spent in some of our larger cities. But you know maybe there was some reason to be uncomfortable, and the two guys really had no good reason to be talking with them. Who can say? I've met people who are nice enough but really have no business hanging around and engaging people in conversation, and I know that sometimes people will engage you like that in order to take advantage of you somehow, with the worst-case scenario being theft/mugging. It's not paranoid to be guarded. Two guys coming up to one man and a woman is not really a kosher situation in my book, and if it were me I'd be on my guard as well. All the more so if he were an older man and they younger. It's not a nice world sometimes. I wish it were, because I enjoy just being friendly.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Pushed on you, eh? (like how I said "eh?"--I'm working on my Canadian )

I think this is a ridiculous article, because no one who wasn't there in the middle of it is in a position to comment on the nature of the encounter.

I don't see any reason to pin this on Michigan residents or gun owners as a whole. Some people are unfriendly or paranoid. I've passed people who are uncomfortable in response to a friendly "hello ", and sometimes people just refuse to acknowledge you. Maybe it's due to time spent in some of our larger cities. But you know maybe there was some reason to be uncomfortable, and the two guys really had no good reason to be talking with them. Who can say? I've met people who are nice enough but really have no business hanging around and engaging people in conversation, and I know that sometimes people will engage you like that in order to take advantage of you somehow, with the worst-case scenario being theft/mugging. It's not paranoid to be guarded. Two guys coming up to one man and a woman is not really a kosher situation in my book, and if it were me I'd be on my guard as well. All the more so if he were an older man and they younger. It's not a nice world sometimes. I wish it were, because I enjoy just being friendly.

True. We need to pin these actions on the person most directly responsible. Up here, two people walking up to you in the middle of a park (that's usually populated with 500-1000 people; it's a big park) isn't cause for alarm. If he had spent a little more time up here, he'd know that. He's a police offer. He'd just be able to talk to any RCMP officer or any CPS (calgary police services), and get their viewpoint on the park, so that way we wouldn't have these types of situations. I'm just glad he didn't have his firearm. He might have faced murder 2 and be barred from entering the country.

I really doubt it, Ferno. First of all he was a police officer, and even if he wasn't he would have been in possession of a CCW license, and in either case the individual, no matter how paranoid, is well aware of the consequences of "brandishing", never mind using a firearm. I'm going to say the most likely worst-case scenario if he WERE carrying would be placing his hand on the gun in its holster and ordering the men to back off. Not very nice if they didn't mean any harm, but not exactly a brush with death as long as they are in possession of their wits and recognize what's going on.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I really doubt it, Ferno. First of all he was a police officer, and even if he wasn't he would have been in possession of a CCW license, and in either case the individual, no matter how paranoid, is well aware of the consequences of "brandishing", never mind using a firearm. I'm going to say the most likely worst-case scenario if he WERE carrying would be placing his hand on the gun in its holster and ordering the men to back off. Not very nice if they didn't mean any harm, but not exactly a brush with death as long as they are in possession of their wits and recognize what's going on.

Wouldn't happen here. No one is allowed any CCW of any sort here. Not even an off-duty officer. The two who approached him were Calgary Oil promoters, so he had no reason to be suspicious. Because they look like this.

If it couldn't happen, then why did you suggest it might have?

Because in the letter he wrote, he said he wished he had his gun at his side.

If he had, "international incident" wouldn't adequately describe the shitstorm that would have ensued.

And my reply was in response to the notion that having his gun meant he would have used it. It doesn't usually escalate like that down here. I understand his comments to mean that he felt there was a threat, and felt it keenly enough (being outnumbered 2-1), that he wished for a firearm to give him a better chance of being in a position to effectively respond to it. I think it would be a mistake to take that as if he wished he had shot one or both.

Carrying a pistol gives you confidence you don't otherwise have in the face of threat, and specifically when you are otherwise at a disadvantage (outnumbered), and that confidence is not restricted to when you have the gun at full draw. It's something you have to fall back on if things go very badly, when you might otherwise have to rely on flight (more difficult when you're acting as a guardian), offering ineffective resistance, or just not having any option at all.

Also, why do you need two guys to hand out tickets to one couple? I find the explanation for who they were to be questionable. Maybe he should have gunned down the one as a warning to the other, and to increase efficiency. [/dark humor]

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Also, why do you need two guys to hand out tickets to one couple? I find the explanation for who they were to be questionable. Maybe he should have gunned down the one as a warning to the other, and to increase efficiency. [/dark humor]

because handing out tickets and promoting the event is their job.

I'm embarrassed for America. I wish I was Canadian, but I don't think I'm a good enough person to live there.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Carrying a pistol gives you confidence you don't otherwise have in the face of threat, and specifically when you are otherwise at a disadvantage (outnumbered), and that confidence is not restricted to when you have the gun at full draw. It's something you have to fall back on if things go very badly, when you might otherwise have to rely on flight (more difficult when you're acting as a guardian), offering ineffective resistance, or just not having any option at all.

So in other words, carrying around a hammer all day makes everything start looking like nails.

vision wrote:I'm embarrassed for America. I wish I was Canadian, but I don't think I'm a good enough person to live there.

I can show you a few good spots; you'd fit right in.

Top Gun wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Carrying a pistol gives you confidence you don't otherwise have in the face of threat, and specifically when you are otherwise at a disadvantage (outnumbered), and that confidence is not restricted to when you have the gun at full draw. It's something you have to fall back on if things go very badly, when you might otherwise have to rely on flight (more difficult when you're acting as a guardian), offering ineffective resistance, or just not having any option at all.

So in other words, carrying around a hammer all day makes everything start looking like nails.

No, that's a completely different though. Thank you for the bonehead perspective, though. It may be true in some cases, but in my opinion it's not a good enough argument to leave oneself defenseless. As in every aspect of life, it's what you bring to the table that counts.

Also, I think you're putting the responsibility for peaceful coexistence on the wrong party. We all have a responsibility to treat others fairly, and to be at peace. A person carrying certainly has the responsibility not to provoke situations just because they can fall back on their gun, but when someone actually targets them or their loved one with nefarious intent, the responsibility for being at peace is not so much with the person able to defend themselves, and the breach of peace should not be laid on their shoulders when they're prompted to call on lethal force.

vision wrote:I'm embarrassed for America. I wish I was Canadian, but I don't think I'm a good enough person to live there.

So you are embarrassed over the actions of a couple of Americans who posted something. Wow. Maybe you should leave. And Ferno, I live in MI and know of no such "culture" as you describe or try to infer. Don't know your frame of mind that had you looking up such tripe but I'd guess you are trying for some sort of moral superiority. Nice try tho.

I know of no carpenters who carry around a hammer all day that start to view everything as nails.

Pure silliness.

vision wrote:I'm embarrassed for America. I wish I was Canadian, but I don't think I'm a good enough person to live there.

I moved to Toronto over a year ago for work. It's got the feel of an American big city, except clean, safe, and friendly. With the exchange rate these days, it's a good time to live there too if you're getting paid in US$.

Spidey wrote:I know of no carpenters who carry around a hammer all day that start to view everything as nails.

hammer == gun, nail == dealing with people.

Yea…thanks for clearing that up…

…it’s not like it wasn’t brain dead obvious or anything.

Ferno wrote:

Spidey wrote:Our culture is none of your business.

At least we don't condone the rape of children.

So butt out.

your culture is very much our business when it's pushed on us by this person.

now. are you going to address the article, or take pot shots at me?

If those guys had asked me about the Stampede, I could've answered them because I've actually heard about it, unlike a few clueless Americans who don't bother to hear about anything that goes on outside our own borders. However, if tourists from other countries come to the U.S., this is the kind of violence they'll be greeted with. That's why that cop felt the way he did when confronted by a couple of unknown men and you can't blame him for his unease either.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html

Spidey wrote:Yea…thanks for clearing that up…

…it’s not like it wasn’t brain dead obvious or anything.

So why the absurdest response?

tunnelcat wrote:That's why that cop felt the way he did when confronted by a couple of unknown men and you can't blame him for his unease either.

Sure I can. It's his job to find information out. It's not like he was vacationing in an area that's known for violence.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:No, that's a completely different though. Thank you for the bonehead perspective, though. It may be true in some cases, but in my opinion it's not a good enough argument to leave oneself defenseless. As in every aspect of life, it's what you bring to the table that counts.

Also, I think you're putting the responsibility for peaceful coexistence on the wrong party. We all have a responsibility to treat others fairly, and to be at peace. A person carrying certainly has the responsibility not to provoke situations just because they can fall back on their gun, but when someone actually targets them or their loved one with nefarious intent, the responsibility for being at peace is not so much with the person able to defend themselves, and the breach of peace should not be laid on their shoulders when they're prompted to call on lethal force.

Serious question here: in what crazy, fucked-up fantasy world does one have to live in to be approached by two friendly strangers in a public park in broad daylight (strangers apparently dressed as derpy Canadian cowboys, no less) and have the immediate reaction of "Oh ★■◆●, I'm threatened, I wish I had my piece"? That's no world in which I want to live, not least of which because it doesn't exist outside of the minds of the deluded. I'm intensely thankful that Officer Wawra doesn't serve in my community, because he's the very sort of fuckwit who would shoot first at a suspect and ask questions never. What, the poor guy doesn't feel like a real man without his big shiny compensation hanging at his side?

I mean, this is a direct quote from the guy's follow-up:

"What concerned me is two young men just approached us and stopped us, stopping us by being in our path, and [began] talking to us without even being welcome to talk to us."

Get some goddamn help you lunatic.

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:That's why that cop felt the way he did when confronted by a couple of unknown men and you can't blame him for his unease either.

Sure I can. It's his job to find information out. It's not like he was vacationing in an area that's known for violence.

Cop out (no pun intended) answer. Remember your response about the Afghan guy who raped the little boy and how you jumped on the bandwagon saying it was a cultural thing. Well cops here in the states have "culturally" learned to be wary of strangers. His job is to protect people and enforce the laws...not be a walking encyclopedia. No nice try once again on being understanding

woodchip wrote:Cop out (no pun intended) answer. Remember your response about the Afghan guy who raped the little boy and how you jumped on the bandwagon saying it was a cultural thing. Well cops here in the states have "culturally" learned to be wary of strangers. His job is to protect people and enforce the laws...not be a walking encyclopedia. No nice try once again on being understanding

This has nothing to do with that. His job ended as soon as he left his home town and restarted when he went back.

I want you to understand something. I have friends who are both retired and active duty, and lineage that was active duty. So, I have a little more understanding than you think.

Well if his job ended when he left then so did his job to know everything about your country.

woodchip wrote:Well if his job ended when he left then so did his job to know everything about your country.

Ignorance is still no excuse.

would you travel to guatamela, japan, or even spain without knowing at least a little about it?

Ferno wrote: would you travel to guatamela, japan, or even spain without knowing at least a little about it?

highly likely. American tourists are pretty much known for that sort of stuff worldwide. Way too many of us go to a foreign country and expect it to be like the US.

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:That's why that cop felt the way he did when confronted by a couple of unknown men and you can't blame him for his unease either.

Sure I can. It's his job to find information out. It's not like he was vacationing in an area that's known for violence.

Maybe. But when you're on vacation, you're trying not to think about your job. You're only reacting to what you're used to, and in this cop's case, he was assuming things were the same in Canada as they are here when a perfect stranger walks up to you. I even put my guard up in my small town when some strange male I don't know walks up to me unprompted and asks questions. My warning radar goes off whether I want it to or not. Sure it's a bad reaction, but when you live in a country where there's so much violence and especially if you're a cop who has to deal with it day to day in your job, you tend get hard-wired to react that way. It's not Canada's fault, it' America's fault.

blaming your society isn't the answer. taking personal responsibility and doing due diligence should be the answer.

yeah, like there is no crime in Canada:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 30396.html

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014 ... anada.html

really, Woody......are you really going to go to those and invite comparisons of ANY violent crimes between the two nations? Seriously?

Ferno wrote:blaming your society isn't the answer. taking personal responsibility and doing due diligence should be the answer.

What kind of personal responsibility do I have to take? Why lay it on me? I've been to Canada and found the people there quite nice and I've responded in kind.

tunnelcat wrote:What kind of personal responsibility do I have to take? Why lay it on me? I've been to Canada and found the people there quite nice and I've responded in kind.

I'm not talking about you specifically. But it is kind of lame to blame an entire society for the failings of one person. It's excellent to see you've done a service and represented the states in a good light.


---------------

woodchip wrote:yeah, like there is no crime in Canada:

and this is the absurdity we're talking about. Trying to connect two promoters offering tickets to people in a park to mass murders is as just hilarious as thinking you're going to get mugged in broad daylight in a park in a city with very low violent crime rates by two people in uniform.

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:What kind of personal responsibility do I have to take? Why lay it on me? I've been to Canada and found the people there quite nice and I've responded in kind.

I'm not talking about you specifically. But it is kind of lame to blame an entire society for the failings of one person. It's excellent to see you've done a service and represented the states in a good light.

I haven't been to Canada for quite a while, but I did go on a salmon fishing trip up in the B.C. wilderness area with my dad and the other time I went with my husband to the 1986 World Exposition. Both times I found the Canadians to be quite pleasant and friendly. I don't think I ever felt the need to watch around myself like I do when I walk around in a big U.S. city.

vision wrote:I'm embarrassed for America. I wish I was Canadian, but I don't think I'm a good enough person to live there.

Ha, I missed this comment…

So one guy with possible mild paranoia and a conditioned response makes a comment about being uncomfortable without something he is used to having with him, and an entire country has a hissy fit.

Dude you would be better off embarrassed for Canada.

Mild Paranoia: Not really a threat to anyone or themselves, opposed to a severe case.
Conditioned Response: Perfectly normal, try leaving your cell phone home one day.
Hissy Fit: Over reaction to one person’s remarks.

Being bewildered and called ng foul on an overreaction is not a hissy fit