If there was any amount of gun smuggling taking place, I’d say the guns would morel likely flow from Canada to the US. Canadians are legally able to buy guns that are not legally available in the US. These guns were banned for importation from their country of manufacture, notably the People’s Republic of China, into the US. Last time I checked, Norinco-made rifles and handguns were still for sale in Canada at rather low prices. If Canadians also have access to stuff like the semi-auto variant of the Israeli Tavor, there’s a hefty population of frustrated gun owners here in the US who would love to own that stuff.
IRL, I doubt there’d be any real amount of gun running taking place, as such guns are getting smuggled here now in such small quantities that I’ve never even heard of it actually happening.
Honestly, I’m not trying to be dense or a jerk here, but I cannot understand you. Your own argument isn’t even supporting itself.
Your position is that Canadians would change their attitude towards guns if the border was slightly more open, and you are arguing, in support of this argument, that you already know Canadians who would like to shoot other people. (Incidentally, no, I don’t know anyone like that.)
So let me get this straight; your argument that people will change thier attitude towards guns if we stop checking every 100th car at the Peace Bridge is that people already demonstrate the attitude you don’t want them to have. So, um, would you mind explaining what’s going to change? Won’t the people who wish they had a gun to “back them up in an argument,” which of course just happens so darned much in the USA (note sarcasm) still wish it, and won’t the ones that won’t, won’t?
Aside for the absurd exagerration and falsehood, okay, let’s pretend this is true. Explain, please, how an open border will change people attitudes.
You seem positively terrified of Americans, as if their presence here will somehow infect us. I mean, you do know that won’t happen, right?
Er… all over the place.
Have you ever been to the United States? Do you know any Americans? I mean, the country is not, in fact, “3:10 To Yuma.”
As time goes by, the Canadian/Usian border will gradually become more porous and this will be a moot point. Our countries are inextricably tied to one another, both culturally and politically.
I can only hope that some of the saner element of Canadian culture are adopted by their southern brethren. We could use a dose of sanity occasionally.
Also interesting to think if the dynamics of a Congress with about 10% Canadians in it, of (presumably) now-established Canadian political parties – Liberal, Conservative, New Democratic, Parti Quebecois – with no institutional links to the Democrats or the Republicans, and not neatly mapping onto the American party system ideologically or culturally. Which means, while the Dems and the Pubs would continue to predominate in Congress, each of the Canadian parties would be free to support one side or the other at any moment on any issue according to their own interests/judgment . . . and, collectively, the Canadian Caucus would be numerous enough to swing any close votes . . .
I see a slow infiltration of cultural conservatism into Canada’s central and eastern provinces, as the parties discover that they can trade off alliance to cultural conservatism in return for lower taxes/less regulation (i.e. think Texas,) or in return for keeping their welfare state while pretending to be against the welfare state (think Louisiana and Mississippi).
Fortunately it might take up to 30 years to accomplish. I say that because that’s around how long it took for the political Christian Right to become completely in thrall to the Fiscal conservatives in America. It was going on since the mid 70s, but only in the late-2000s did I discover that radio preachers were talking consistently and often about fiscal conservatism. It was quite jarring to suddenly hear ministers uh-preach about uh-fiscal uh-policy in the same uh-manner in which they talk about Jesus.
I am for a more open border but I have to correct factual errors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Ressam
[troll]Do you really want to be overrun with a horde of goodfernothin’ mablesyrup-backs [/troll]
I don’t seem to be making my points very well, so I’m going to bow out of this argument. I will, however, address these questions:
Yes, I have been to the United States many times. Both on my own, and as a Canadian married to an American for a number of years. We–she and I–had many friends there, and we were there many times to visit our spread-out friends and her family. I have stayed as a guest in their homes. As a businessman, I was frequently there on business; and I certainly hosted Americans from our US offices many times here. Such meetings involved a lot of socializing; and consequently, a lot of conversation. With all these contacts, I’ve met everybody from California surfers to Texas rednecks to Seattle environmentalists to Alaskan pipeliners to Boston intellectuals, and a whole lot of others. When it comes to Americans, I’m speaking from my experience with them; usually as more than just a tourist.
I have never seen “3:10 to Yuma.”
'Nuff said.
I think those trade routes were developed during prohibition, Canada made quite a good living by both manufacturing and importing booze for “export”
E.G. Labatt produced beer for Export through their own prohibition. And here in Seattle the biggest rum runner was an ex-policemen who at the time was the largest private employer in the city, he would pick up cuban rum in BC via boat.
http://kcts9.org/prohibition/rum-runners-canada-role-prohibition
Its really about attitudes. Except for vinegar on fries, I consider Canada to have a sane, functional society. I would hate to have it submerged into our largely dysfunctional, irrational USA, because it is important to have a real life example that sanity is possible. Btw, I don’t notice any sensitivity in the posts about using “American” to mean “USA”.
Open borders would be like taking down the fence between the panda cage and the tiger cage. Maybe nothing would happen, but it just doesn’t seem like a good idea. The concern about our “wild west” banking system is spot on. The fence gives the Canadians some peace of mind.
I couldn’t find anything about running out of ammunition. Some years ago I read an article in which, through various logistical SNAFUs the Canadian military as a whole was theoretically “out of ammunition.” I wasn’t able to find the article on Google and am not willing to spend any more time on it, so believe/disbelieve it as you will.
My assertion about embracing Islamic extremists is not a factual one but an opinion and thus not subject to cite requirements.
No, it is factually the case the reason the border is the way it is right now is because in the aftermath of 9/11 we started requiring Canadians to have passport documentation to enter the United States. Some 8-10 months later I believe Canada implemented the same requirement for going into Canada. Do you deny the factual nature of that statement?
As for the rest of it, I think there has to be a clarification of definition. Does “open border” mean “open resettlement.” In that scenario, I could see Canada essentially being destroyed as a political “concept” because as economic fortunes twist and turn there would be people moving to Canada for work who would change its culture permanently (and as certain areas of the U.S. enter booms Canadians would move to take advantage of jobs there), eventually it would just intermix so much with the much larger United States it would cease to really be a true separate nation (at least culturally.)
But I didn’t take this thread to be about “open immigration” but instead just a relaxation of border controls. No change in visa laws or anything like that, so I’m positing a scenario where I (an American) would be allowed and able to drive into Canada with no check points being passed and no presenting of documentation but it would still be illegal for me to stay longer than x amount of time or to work in Canada. In that scenario I don’t see how what would essentially be increased U.S. tourism does all those doomsday scenarios to Canada. If you’re not legally allowed to permanently reside or work in a country you’re unlikely to stay there for extended periods in large numbers and thus unlikely to cause any of the erosion of Canadian identity you fear so much.
I think the guns issue is basically the largest red herring I’ve ever seen.
Very few people believe that even spending three times as much as we currently do on border control with Mexico (tripling the border patrol, more fences, more technology) would seriously impact the illegal immigration problem or the smuggling of drugs from Mexico into the United States.
Ultra-intense border controls can work in places like North Korea or East Germany, the geography permits it. Not on the Mexican border. What that means is, the flow of contraband (both people and commodities) is basically economic. As long as we have available jobs for illegal immigrants they will find a way in, and as long as we have a market for opiates, marijuana and meth we’ll find it coming up from Mexico.
Now replace “Mexico” with “Canada.” Anything legal or just “more easily obtained” in America for which there was demand in Canada, would be getting into Canada regardless of the border controls. The strength of those controls just impacts the price of the contraband in the other country which might have some impact on demand, but when price goes up smugglers multiply as it is seen as a more lucrative venture so even with increased border security an increase in smugglers will maintain or increase the flow of illegal commodities which will push the price back downward.
It’s a ridiculous opinion based on not a shred of evidence actually connected to the universe in which you live. If you’re not willing to back it up, well, that says something.
Honestly, this thread has become an exchange of ingorance from both sides; we’ve got you saying, in defiance of all fact and reason, that Canada’s a big fan of Islamic extremism, and a Canadian saying the USA is going to destroy our multiculturalism if we let them into the country (the irony there is delicious.) I’m starting to think we should open the border just so people can learn something about what’s going on on the other side of the border.
I think I’ve found some evidence of the article I remember about Canada’s ammunition. I can’t find a full text of it online, but it appeared in the Globe and Mail on 1/27/2004, written by Christie Blatchford. It looks like what actually happened is many Canadian reserve units had ran out of ammunition so were unable to do any live fire exercises and some units had even ran out of “Simunition.” I was incorrect in stating this was a problem with the Canadian military as a whole.
As for the Islamic extremist comment, based on what I’ve seen Canadians just love extremist Imams and such moving in to their country. You guys have “Humans Rights councils” that will start farcical investigations of Canadian citizens based on the complaints of radical Muslim leaders who establish organizations with the goal of implementing Sharia law in Canada, who equate Israel’s actions in the Middle East with the actions of the Nazis during the Holocaust, and who blamed the deaths of over 200,000 people to the Indian Ocean tsunami to divine retribution for immoral Christians who had vacationed in Indonesia prior to the tsunami.
Again, this isn’t happening in this universe. You’re very confused and not familiar with the facts. Canadians “love extremist Imams” about as much as two equals seven. Canadians don’t even KNOW any.
Imagine if a Canadian were to come in here and say that Americans are so obsessed with guns that the majority of American schoolchildren in elementary grades go to school with handguns, and that shootouts between children and their teachers are a common fact of life, but the NRA now runs most schools so nobody can do anything about it and anyway the daily school gun battles are supported by most Americans who love how it improves marksmanship. Silly, isn’t it?
You sound like that.
As to the ammunition thing, thank you for admitting you were wrong. You’re one for two so far. Incidentally, the reserve army certainly didn’t run out of ammunition; it’s normal for a reserve unit to expend all its range ammunition over the course of the fiscal year. In the reserve unit I was a part of we actually did this on purpose - if we had extra ammo in March we’d drive out to the range and shoot it all off so that there wouldn’t be any chance of us not getting at least as much the following year. So technically we “ran out of ammunition” every March, no matter how much we had; one day we blew off like ten thousand rounds just so it wouldn’t be there the week after. (Yes, it’s wasteful.) However, that’s just the 5.56 kept on hand for range practice; there’s a huge amount of stuff in reserve if a unit is actually deployed.
“Simunition” is rarely used. Ms. Blatchford, who has some personal issues with manliness, is just stirring shit up in an effort to create the perception of a problem that does not exist. The Canadian Forces over the last 5-10 years has been as well supplied and equipped as it has been since Korea.
I think I feel a sig line change coming on. 
Funny enough as far as border crossings go it tends to be Canada that restricts entrance more than the US if we are talking about US and Canadian citizens.
It is always a pleasure to discover your friend had a DUI two decades ago when you are turned around at the border.
Seriously - you live right next door and this is your impression of Canada?
It would be right up there with me saying … actually I really can’t think of anything sufficiently removed from reality that could be comparable.
It could involve either. I’ve had a positive experience with Canadian border officials, but it is a hassle.
Are Canadian employers required to check documentation? Down here in the US, employers are required by law to check your authorization to work (i.e. prove you are a citizen or that you have a visa authorizing you to work, and that you are not an illegal immigrant, tourist, or student not permitted to work here.)
It does seem to be the case that even with open EU/Schengen borders with cross-border rights to residency and work that the national cultures or languages of, say, France, Germany, Spain, Poland, etc. are not in danger. Where are the reports that Portugal is filling up with so many Spaniards and Frenchmen that the Portuguese are complaining that they are losing their national identity?
Look, we’re the only nation in the world that has ever claimed “American” as its demonym, leave it alone.