And as I’ve just demonstrated, she lies about statistics too. Check it out in the same thread linked above.
As a Canadian lawyer, I find her misuse of crime statistics quite astonishing, particularly when she asserts that “Canada . . . [is] much more dangerous than the United States.”
For the record, the murder rate in Canada is “barely 2 per 100,000” whereas in the USA it is “almost 6 per 100,000” and “surpasses that of every other industrialized country in the world” Correctional Services Canada, 2001.
It’s not as though you couldn’t see that coming. It was just a matter of time.
[minor hijack]Only if you don’t count North Ireland, Taiwan, Brazil, and Mexico as “industrialized countries” (Among a few others). Cite, includes sources, unlike the canadian page. Though it does confirm the same rates for the US and Canada that you cited, so it’s only a minor nitpick 
[/minor hijack]
Good point.
Madam Susanann:
I have always worn pants and yes I am female. I was allowed to wear them in school in 1971 and that was in UTAH! Yes, home of the conservative.
Have friends who like guns.. but man I hope I nevver meet her.. she prolly shoots facially pierced goths on sight...No, no, no. You’re supposed to launch into some wild, increasingly desperate attempt to show that the U.S. does so have the highest murder rate in the history of the known Universe, based on the contention that Northern Ireland is not an industrialized country (everyone knows Ireland is filled with potato farmers); that Taiwan doesn’t count (since everybody agrees it’s just a province of China); and that the murder rate of the South Bronx is much higher than that of the state of Tlaxcala (a valid comparison, since both areas contain an “x” in their names), plus you can’t expect Mexico to have as high a murder rate as the U.S. as Mexico is filled with Mexicans and Mexicans simply lack the initiative to kill each other in the numbers White Anglo-Saxon Protestants are capable of racking up.
Sheesh, Muffin, you can’t just say “good point”. What were you thinking?
LOL, MEBuckner.
Actually, my mind was elsewhere, so here’s as good a rant as you’ll ever be likely to see from me.
Two people in Ontario died by violent means today.
One was a six year old boy who was shot by his seven year old sister when she found a twenty-two year old’s unregistered handgun in a bedroom in a nice, middle class home in Mississauga. This was an easily preventable tragedy, for without the handgun, there never would have been a death.
One was an old man who was beaten before new years by a middle-aged man here in my city, and who clung to life until today. This was the only murder in my community in 2002 (my city is usually at or near the top for violent crime of cities in Canada of 100,000 or so population, so 2002 was almost a stellar year). This death was not as easily preventable, for violent drunks are hard to prevent, and although keeping them clear of guns can help, the drunks will still occasionally kill, if only with their bare hands.
What has had me off my feed is that a close friend of mine is being harassed by her ex. She and her five children left him when she was woken up one night by his throttling her. (After separating, he then quit his job, went bankrupt leaving her with five kids and all the debt, and then tried to sue her for support – I took great satisfaction in hauling his lawyer and his bankruptcy trustee in front of a judge and having is last remaining paycheques seized). He is a heavy alcoholic who gets violent when drunk, and he has an arsenal of dozens of unregistered handguns. The police are on to him and there is a restraining order and a firearms prohibition order against him, but he has hidden his guns and has claimed not to own any (ironically, she is a light machine gun instructor, so he has even tried to claim that she was the person with the handguns). He denies illuminating her with a infra-red beam of his sniper scope when she went outside of her new residence to clean up the refuse dumped on her car.
Odds are that over time he will wander off, for if he were going to do something, he probably would have done it in the last few months. He has been made acutely aware that he will not get away with violence against her. Obviously she has been and is taking measures (which I will not go into) to provide for her and her children’s safety, but that is cold comfort. There still remains is a very real possibility that despite the best efforts of her and the authorities (and they are truly doing everything within the law that they can do), things might not work out safely. That scares me. I have represented multiple murderers before. I have represented wife beaters, rapists, child molesters and stalkers. I think that this man has that capacity for violence in him.
She is a very calm, clear thinking person, who does not get riled easily. On Friday as we were about to leave work, she received a telephone call from him that left her sweating and breaking out in a rash.
My little part of the world would be better off without handguns, thank you very much. I don’t want my friend or any of her children to become another Ontario statistic.
Let me re-phrase what you are saying. Please correct me if I am wrong:
-
This man has “dozens of unregistered handguns”, yet no one turned him in when he had them, before they were hidden? He didn’t get them overnight - contrary to what Hollywood tells you, you don’t just go out and buy a big bag o’ handguns and cart them home one day - they typically are purchased or collected over an extended time. I don’t even know gun collectors in the US that own “dozens” of handguns. How does anyone know he actually has them? Did she know he had them? And if so, why didn’t she turn him in?
-
You claim she is a “light machine gun instructor” - in Canada? The only way I know that that can happen is if she is a law enforcement officer.
-
You seem to say that she is, for all purposes, helpless, terrorized by a criminal with an enormous arsenal of illegal weapons that somehow does not interest the police enough to do anything about, he threatens her continuously, and that the police can somehow not do anything to save her. You describe a situation right out of a movie.
-
So…a crazy man with loads of illegal weapons (which somehow, someway, no one acted to take from him or to report him while he still had them handy - isn’t that a violation of the law, BTW?) and yet everyone knows he has them, is now threatening a woman who is a “light machine gun” instructor in Canada of all places, and the police cannot or will not stop him, so, your solution is…what again? Get rid of handguns? Does the fact that he already by your own words is in violation of the law on myriad counts tell you that banning handguns would make him change his course of action any?
There’s certainly nothing wrong with taking a position that reducing arms in society works to reduce violent acts and deaths. But how do the laws in place help the subject of your story?
FTR, it is not an “infra-red beam”, nor is it a “sniper scope”. “Infrared” gunsight lasers are of limited use without night vision goggles, and quite rare. And if she can see infrared radiation that would be quite surprising. And how do you know it wasn’t a $3 laser pointer? (which are not yet illegal in Canada - but soon?) Idiots and assholes pull that stunt with laser pointers all the time, and the natural assumption is not that it’s a person with a gun - even in America.
**
He obtained them (illegally) over about fifteen years while they were together. She did not report him. Her mistake. Her very big mistake. No third party witnesses either, not even the kids, for this was their dirty little secret, and since she was not involved with the guns (other than permitting their presence and keeping their presence a secret), she can’t go back up the chain for witnesses to the procurements.
**
Canadian military. . Note, I should have used the past tense rather than the present tense, for she is not active at the present.
**
She is far from helpless, although it took the throttling incident to shake her into recognition that she had to start to stand up to him, and has taken both time and counselling to help her learn to deal with his behaviour rather than simply put up with it. The police have done an excellent job so far, including getting him tossed in the can for a brief period, and of course searching his place from top to bottom and making their presence regularly known to him. I take my hat off to them for being able to do so much with so little to go on. Her lawyers have done a bang up job in the civil aspect (BTW, I have only filled in when work has had to be done very quickly – I am way too close to take the lead myself. Her primary counsel have been terrific).
As far as threats go, there is the problem of proof. For example he has simply denied the red illumination (or whatever you call it) incident. The Friday call was not screened by the receptionist because it came at the end of the day when the receptionist had already left, and as a law firm we obviously do not tape calls. You see, it comes down to having enough proof, and she simply does not have it. You are showing healthy scepticism, so imagine what a court would think when the standard is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ So far, it has been ‘he said/she said’ with little to no proof on either side, so until he slips up, her legal recourse is limited.
**
In as much as she permitted the collection to exist on her property and he claims that if there were any guns they were hers, she could run afoul of Criminal Code sections 91, 92, 93, 95 and 97(3), but since the police buy her story and reject his, she is not being prosecuted. Her fear of prosecution is one of the reasons that she did not come clean earlier, well before he hid the collection.
No, this is not a matter of everyone knowing of the arsenal. If everyone knew he had this arsenal, then this problem would have been taken care of long ago. Like I said above, she made a big mistake in not reporting earlier.
**
In as much as handguns are very tightly controlled in Canada, no, a total banning of handguns in Canada would not be a solution, for Canada is incapable of stopping the flow of handguns from the USA. Some people would still obtain handguns illegally (as her ex did) and, as I pointed out, violent drunks will sometimes kill even without guns. Since extremely few people have handgun fetishes to the point of collecting dozens (over sixty by her account), I accept your supposition that even with a handgun ban he would maintain the same course of action. BTW, in Canada you have to have a very good reason carry a handgun (e.g. police, sport shooters, prospectors up in polar bear country, etc.). Please note that I did not say that I wanted a statutory ban on handguns, but rather that my little part of the world would be better off without handguns. I’d love to click my heels together three times and wish them out of existence, but I don’t see any practicable way of eliminating them. Tight control such as we already have will have to suffice. In Canada handguns are hard to get and even harder to carry, so I don’t think tightening up the law further beyond what is in the Criminal Code at the moment (including the new registration legislation) will help much.
**
With respect to my friend’s situation, rather than the overall gun debate, the laws in place here have made it possible for the police to search his premises, get him tossed in the can for a short period and have a restraining order made against him (for the assault, not for a handgun offence), get a firearms prohibition order against him, and generally put the fear of god in him that should he ever be found with a gun he will do time. Hopefully this will discourage him from wandering about with a gun. If he does not have a gun on or near him when he starts to get drunk, then I expect that there would be less chance of him using a gun. (What is of great concern is that when shit faced he might go get one of his guns.)
Thanks for the correction. Yes, it was a little red light. I asked he if it was a laser pointer, and she said that although it might have been, he did own a sniper scope with one of these lights, and when they were together he did not own a classroom laser pointer. It was certainly not infra red night vision goggles. My apologies for not using the correct terminology.
So the bottom line is that she has one heck of a proof problem – he said/she said with nothing that holds water on either side. One could say that by going along with his illegal collecting for so many years, she has made her bed and must now lie in it, but that does not help with where to go from here. Had she realized the seriousness of the situation earlier and obeyed our tight handgun laws, or at least reported him for violating our tight handgun laws, perhaps he would be locked up rather than loose, or would be wandering about trying to obtain a handgun (which I admit he would probably obtain) rather than already having dozens stashed away. (When pressed on why she did not report earlier, she has consistently claimed that she was scared of what he would do if his guns were taken away. Whether this perception was valid or simply a result of his ongoing abuse I do not know.)
You have mentioned that I have described a scene right out of a movie. Aside from the very high number of guns and her background in the military, this is pretty mundane stuff as far as domestic violence and threats of domestic violence go. (I’m just glad that when he tried to throttle her in her sleep he did not shoot her, for he certainly had easy access to his guns at that time.) Here is a series of annual reports from Statistics Canada that look at domestic violence, including the chilling connection between domestic violence during a relationship and homicide after the relationship: http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-224-XIE/free.htm
I think that greater effort put toward preventing such violence is needed, which means dealing with a great many problems, ranging from addictions to mental health to poverty to attitudes toward women, etc. Tweaking already tight handgun controls will not make much of a difference, for the law can only do so much, but I still most heartily wish that handguns did not exist.
Such is my rant. I wish that handguns did not exist, and I fear for the safety of my friend and her children. Whether you buy her allegations or not, thanks for taking the time to listen.
Muffin - thank you for the very informative and detailed response. I understand the situation in your rant much better now, and I have to say I agree with you on almost every point. And any point which I don’t is really not worth discussing here.
I have to wonder about these things. No, I]m not doubting your story, but looking back on the chains of events, it just seems so pointless. So many people getting hurt, or one person getting very hurt. 
And please don’t take my “movie” comment to mean I doubted your story. I often use that comment to describe events which happen to me (which typically seem to fall into the genre of “Horror/Suspense”).
It is a surprising thing to me, anecdotally speaking, that many women I know who are/were in the military or on a police force - who have gone through years of tough training and weeding-out which should have been confidence-building - and who sometimes are very, very good at self-defense - often seem to end up in abusive relationships. Almost every woman I know who was in the military or a police force has had at least one abusive relationship, and it seems scary, since you would think (speaking off the cuff here) that women in those situations would be best equipped (mentally and physically) to take care of themselves.
I wonder what the hell is going on? Do I simply have a misperception, or is there a trend?
Pointless? Absolutely. It never fails to astound me when people who could and should simply walk away insist on continuing to try to hurt their ex-partners. My guess is that it is a power and control thing that gets way out of hand as the hate builds. I say this simply because I have noticed a correlation between spouses early on in their relationships trying to limit their partners’ ability to go out of the house, maintain a job, make independent decisions, etc., and then later on getting more and more verbally and physically abusive.
The psychology behind why spouses permit themselves to be abused for quite some time before doing something about it is quite beyond me. I’ve noticed that even when spouses leaves due to violence, quite often those spouses return one or more times to attempt reconciliation. I don’t have any data on this – it is just something that I see a lot.
As far as people who are trained to be assertive still falling into this violence trap, yes I have seen it with police officers, lawyers and doctors, as well as many other walks of life. Profession does not seem to prepare one for personal domestic violence. (In fact, my friend has the physical ability and training to easily take on her ex, and with a couple of university degrees is no dummy, but psychologically it is as if she is wearing a tin foil hat to which he is beaming mind control waves. Often it leaves me wondering WTF!) We don’t have many military personnel in Canada, so I simply have not had enough military clients to know if there is a trend or not, and by the time a person comes to me there is a good chance of there having been abuse regardless of background or gender. I’m a litigator who does a fair number of family disputes, so by the time a person needs my services, that person is usually in one hell of a mess, so my clients are in no way representative of the general population. But yes, all of those very few from the military that I have worked with have tolerated extended physical abuse. I don’t know if it is more common in the military or not
The Canadian Nurses Association has a good brief explanation that puts it far better that I can (although I would note that men also are exposed to domestic violence, though overall at a lesser frequency and lesser degree than do women – see those Stats Can studies I cited earlier):
**
Pointless is a very good word for it. It is all so very pointless.
I am not at all concerned at all about the ‘movie’ comment, but I did mistakenly think it expressed disbelief. That was simply my poor reading because it took me a while to become convinced myself. I see a lot of scurrilously false accusations concerning domestic abuse, so I think that healthy scepticism is important to separate the wheat from the chaff. It took a while for me to realize that my friend was on the up and up rather than confabulating things to improve her bargaining position.
There are some interesting situations in town that might be worthy of being put into a movie script:
[ul]
[li]A fellow who skipped his children’s access mediation because he was on the run from the law for going after his brother with an axe, but then came out on top in the mediation (despite his own absence) because his spouse had been convicted of beating the shit out of a paraplegic who had been tending the children she had abandoned to go stripping out of town for a few months.[/li][li]A fellow in his mid-30s who wanted custody of his infant child until the mother stopped hooking in the same room as the baby and instead went to another room. The really icky part is that the mother was 13, and her family had given the father their blessing.[/li][li]A deeply religious fellow who would not let his children leave the house, who kept quite a few gun in a cave in anticipation of “The Rapture,” and who routinely broke boards over his children’s bottoms in the guise of discipline. (I got the kids away from him in short order, and the police took care of his guns immediately.)[/li][/ul]
There are some really sick puppies out there who are spouses and parents. When put in perspective, my friend’s difficulties are mundane. Serious, but mundane nonetheless.
My impression of Susanann is that, contrary to what she has claimed, she has never been part of the women’s movement and that she is not well-read in feminist literature. In fact, I don’t believe that “she” is a woman at all. Things just don’t add up.
I’ve wondered this myself. I’m giving her the benefit of the doubt for now. I’ll just assume she’s an ignorant, racist, heavily irrational, armed woman who also runs away from anything that would change that. Look up It’s taking longer than we thought in the dictionary, and you’ll find her picture.
Susanann’s latest post in the Bowling for Columbine thread makes it perfectly clear that she has no intention of doing anything other than spreading her own lies. I know I don’t get a vote in this, but I will shed no tears if and when her posting privileges are revoked.
I just don’t understand people like Susanann who spew their stuff and totally ignore what is being said to them. I don’t understand what she gets out of posting here. I don’t understand why she doesn’t just walk away and find a place more suited to her style. It’s not like she’s finding any sympathy or support here.
How entertaining to read posts from someone so ill informed, someone who seems not to understand even the concept of what a message board like this one is for.
This one struck me as hilarious:
So, men started wearing skirts when Marlene Deitrich started wearing pants??? What the hell is she talking about???
Holy crap.
I feel so out of the loop. But maybe this is a good thing. I can’t believe the upchuck that this person, Susanann, has been saying. I have only read this thread (and a few snippets from linked threads) and the other one about Jamie Lee Curtis and clearly this person ( I don’t think she’s a woman, if she is, she’s involved in one of those ummm, skinhead groups that highly unfavored in most of society ) is completely off “her” rocker.
Ignorance abound. Unfortunately I don’t think we will erradicate it in our lifetime.
That’s just some nasty shit “she” is saying.
People like that make you question humanity. Thankfully I know better and there are 10 to her 1 that make the world a better place.
Difficult to even comment on it really.
Oh and if she thinks she’s a Libertarian, WRONG. Libertarians are, for the most part, a very peaceful people who do believe in self protection but don’t go around putting serial murderers as people to look up to and apparently worship. In fact, that goes against any Libertarian ideals.
She aint no Libertarian as far as I am concerned. She’s a wacked out person that needs serious mental health care complete with possible shock treatment. Egads.
I believe the problem with this susanann person is that she has XYZ chromosomes with an extra, twisted “&” chromosome. That is what technically makes her an idiot.
That latest one has it’s very own pit thread.