Every time there is a shooting in the (current) US of A there is a thread. How come I can find no thread when Canada promises to ban handgun sales?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... -magazines
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w172yg1k99g0lkq

While I think that this is good compromise not all may agree.

I'm all for it.

PhilBy wrote:

Every time there is a shooting in the (current) US of A there is a thread. How come I can find no thread when Canada promises to ban handgun sales?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... -magazines
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w172yg1k99g0lkq

While I think that this is good compromise not all may agree.

What compromise are you referring to? They are concerned about illegally smuggled guns so they go after legally owned guns?

PhilBy wrote:

Every time there is a shooting in the (current) US of A there is a thread. How come I can find no thread when Canada promises to ban handgun sales?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... -magazines
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w172yg1k99g0lkq

While I think that this is good compromise not all may agree.

I think the point that guns in Canada are a privilege that can be properly managed rather than a right is key. Better managing legal access while also increasing resources to better deal with illegal imports from the US seems entirely reasonable. Last time I entered Canada (by road) I was only asked whether I had guns.

johns624 wrote:

What compromise are you referring to? They are concerned about illegally smuggled guns so they go after legally owned guns?

We're concerned about new guns coming into Canada, whether illegally/legally - the new ban will only effect new sales or transfers of handguns it has no effect on those who already own them which will further reduce the number of handguns coming into Canada.

So the compromise is that you can keep what you have if you wish, but you can no longer acquire new ones.

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

Every Government tells people what to do, thats kind of what they're there for - just some Governments have different priorities than others.

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

It’s basically America, but less crowded with better public education, less crime, one major sport, and more rational adult behavior overall (less of an entitlement culture). Similar social issues to the US, but with Commonwealth solutions to them like the UK and Australia. In my experience, Canadians, like Australians and Kiwis, are excellent friends and colleagues and somewhat less flaky than Americans.

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

So you're an anarchist who doesn't like laws?

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

It’s basically America, but less crowded with better public education, less crime, one major sport, and more rational adult behavior overall (less of an entitlement culture). Similar social issues to the US, but with Commonwealth solutions to them like the UK and Australia. In my experience, Canadians, like Australians and Kiwis, are excellent friends and colleagues and somewhat less flaky than Americans.

Someone once told me Canadians were like Americans but without the attitude.

Aaron747 wrote:

In my experience, Canadians, like Australians and Kiwis, are excellent friends and colleagues and somewhat less flaky than Americans.

You sound like someone with limited experience in Canada. I’m a dual US-Canadian citizen who has lived and worked in both countries and I still have a lot of family there. I agree wholeheartedly with Canada’s stance on guns, but they’re among the flakiest people I’ve ever encountered. One of the many reasons I left that place was because of Canadians.

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

It’s basically America, but less crowded with better public education, less crime, one major sport, and more rational adult behavior overall (less of an entitlement culture). Similar social issues to the US, but with Commonwealth solutions to them like the UK and Australia. In my experience, Canadians, like Australians and Kiwis, are excellent friends and colleagues and somewhat less flaky than Americans.

As an Australian, visiting Canada for the first time seemed to be like visiting a USA that made sense. Including caring more for the safety of its citizens than its guns.

leader1 wrote:

but they’re among the flakiest people I’ve ever encountered. One of the many reasons I left that place was because of Canadians.

As an example?

And as a Canadian, trust me, I won't be offended - if there's one thing we Canucks do well, its laugh at ourselves

We have our fair share of folks who are against any form of gun control and anything and everything Liberal - mostly concentrated in Alberta which is pretty much our Texas. Newfoundland is kinda our Arkansas. Saskatchewan/Manitoba our Minnesota. BC is kind of Washington, Oregon, California all rolled up into one. Quebec is well, Quebec.

And without going too far off topic, I just want to say I absolutely love my American neighbours, no matter how whacky some of them are. My bucket list is to visit each and every State and Nevada is like a second home to me. Even just crossing the border into Bellingham, I'm happy there.

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

Except for your last sentence, I feel the same way about college students and most people under 30 in the US today. Unfortunately it affects all of us since they can vote.

Visited Canada multiple times in my childhood and always had a great time. They can do what they wish with their laws; as an American, it really isn't my place to cast judgment.

leader1 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

In my experience, Canadians, like Australians and Kiwis, are excellent friends and colleagues and somewhat less flaky than Americans.

You sound like someone with limited experience in Canada. I’m a dual US-Canadian citizen who has lived and worked in both countries and I still have a lot of family there. I agree wholeheartedly with Canada’s stance on guns, but they’re among the flakiest people I’ve ever encountered. One of the many reasons I left that place was because of Canadians.

I have worked with Canadians in California and Japan, not in Canada.

afcjets wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

Except for your last sentence, I feel the same way about college students and most people under 30 in the US today. Unfortunately it affects all of us since they can vote.

Sorry, not convinced it’s solely people under 30 who are the problem.

https://twitter.com/thegoodliars/status ... wyh9OmMehQ

Aaron747 wrote:

afcjets wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

Except for your last sentence, I feel the same way about college students and most people under 30 in the US today. Unfortunately it affects all of us since they can vote.

Sorry, not convinced it’s solely people under 30 who are the problem.

https://twitter.com/thegoodliars/status ... wyh9OmMehQ

Not to mention it’s those people who are inheriting the country. Sorry but I’ve had enough of geriatrics who won’t live to see 2030 getting to make decisions that won’t have any impact on them at all

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

It’s basically America, but less crowded with better public education, less crime, one major sport, and more rational adult behavior overall (less of an entitlement culture). Similar social issues to the US, but with Commonwealth solutions to them like the UK and Australia. In my experience, Canadians, like Australians and Kiwis, are excellent friends and colleagues and somewhat less flaky than Americans.

They are certainly friendlier, less standoffish, and in general understand dry and risque humor a lot better than Americans but again depends on where you are in the US. I remember the first time I went to a smallish city just outside of Toronto and spending the day (ages ago) and I was amazed that people weren't even locking their doors or even their cars. Although, my parents tell me this what Indiana was like in the 60's when my dad was doing his doctorate.

phugoid1982 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

It’s basically America, but less crowded with better public education, less crime, one major sport, and more rational adult behavior overall (less of an entitlement culture). Similar social issues to the US, but with Commonwealth solutions to them like the UK and Australia. In my experience, Canadians, like Australians and Kiwis, are excellent friends and colleagues and somewhat less flaky than Americans.

They are certainly friendlier, less standoffish, and in general understand dry and risque humor a lot better than Americans but again depends on where you are in the US. I remember the first time I went to a smallish city just outside of Toronto and spending the day (ages ago) and I was amazed that people weren't even locking their doors or even their cars. Although, my parents tell me this what Indiana was like in the 60's when my dad was doing his doctorate.

There are still a lot of small towns in the US where people don't lock their car or house doors.

Even today Canadians can only take their handgun to and from a recognized range. It is illegal to use them for hunting. You have to call and get permission from the CFO to take it to a gunsmith for repair or any other location than to the range. If you take it to the range, you can't make any stops or deviations to and from.

johns624 wrote:

Even today Canadians can only take their handgun to and from a recognized range. It is illegal to use them for hunting. You have to call and get permission from the CFO to take it to a gunsmith for repair or any other location than to the range. If you take it to the range, you can't make any stops or deviations to and from.

Stupid question. Suppose your car breaks down en route. Would you then be in violation.

I think one thing that might affect Canadian attitude on the issue compared to American, is probably that most Canadian live in urban area, instead of the US where there are many people and especially many number of states that aren't urban-centric?

c933103 wrote:

I think one thing that might affect Canadian attitude on the issue compared to American, is probably that most Canadian live in urban area, instead of the US where there are many people and especially many number of states that aren't urban-centric?

But Canada has 1/10th the population density of the US of A

AirKevin wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Even today Canadians can only take their handgun to and from a recognized range. It is illegal to use them for hunting. You have to call and get permission from the CFO to take it to a gunsmith for repair or any other location than to the range. If you take it to the range, you can't make any stops or deviations to and from.

Stupid question. Suppose your car breaks down en route. Would you then be in violation.

Technically yes.

c933103 wrote:

I think one thing that might affect Canadian attitude on the issue compared to American, is probably that most Canadian live in urban area, instead of the US where there are many people and especially many number of states that aren't urban-centric?

Not really. Western and northern Canada have a lot of people who live off the grid--First Nation, loggers, trappers, etc.

c933103 wrote:

I think one thing that might affect Canadian attitude on the issue compared to American, is probably that most Canadian live in urban area, instead of the US where there are many people and especially many number of states that aren't urban-centric?

Canada and the US have very similar rates of Urban to rural populations.

https://data.worldbank.org/share/widget ... 0&view=bar

PhilBy wrote:

c933103 wrote:

I think one thing that might affect Canadian attitude on the issue compared to American, is probably that most Canadian live in urban area, instead of the US where there are many people and especially many number of states that aren't urban-centric?

But Canada has 1/10th the population density of the US of A

It does but most of the population is is urban areas and Canada's percentage of the urbanization is consistent with other industrialized nations.
Also don't forget Toronto is the 5th largest city in North America and Ontario would be the 5th largest state if it was in the US.

There is a ton of empty space in Canada yes but we are bunched in certain places.

They will take their guns, but they'll wait until they're dead. Of course, that's just this week. Next week could be different.
While some argue that a parliamentary system is better, I'm not sure if I agree. Unless the ruling party has an extremely shaky coalition, laws are more of a rubber stamp process.

Aaron747 wrote:

It’s basically America

No more like Europe. High tax much more government but if you like it you can live in either.

NIKV69 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

It’s basically America

No more like Europe. High tax much more government but if you like it you can live in either.

Mmmmkay. If that's your take you don't know many Canadians.

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

It’s basically America

No more like Europe. High tax much more government but if you like it you can live in either.

Mmmmkay. If that's your take you don't know many Canadians.

America with a European sensibility. These laws make a lot of sense, and the fantastic thing is that the political system isn't so grid-locked like the US and positive change can happen.

Reading the news stories, it seems like they are concerned with people smuggling illegal guns across the border. How will stopping the sale of legal guns impact this? I can understand putting more resources to border enforcement but I don't understand the rest. I've never heard of many (if any) legal Canadian guns finding their way into criminal hands.

johns624 wrote:

Reading the news stories, it seems like they are concerned with people smuggling illegal guns across the border. How will stopping the sale of legal guns impact this? I can understand putting more resources to border enforcement but I don't understand the rest. I've never heard of many (if any) legal Canadian guns finding their way into criminal hands.

But it's not zero sum. There is no loss in better regulating legal firearms at the same time as increasing resources to address gun smuggling from lax countries if your focus is on need and public safety rather than an 18th century "right".

It's ironic that Canada is seeking to protect itself from the consequences of a "right" enacted to assist the US in resiting invasion from the north.

Kent350787 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Reading the news stories, it seems like they are concerned with people smuggling illegal guns across the border. How will stopping the sale of legal guns impact this? I can understand putting more resources to border enforcement but I don't understand the rest. I've never heard of many (if any) legal Canadian guns finding their way into criminal hands.

But it's not zero sum. There is no loss in better regulating legal firearms at the same time as increasing resources to address gun smuggling from lax countries if your focus is on need and public safety rather than an 18th century "right".

Wrong. Why does something that is already highly regulated need to be even more regulated if there isn't a current problem with it. It appears that you don't know the regulations of "Restricted Firearms" in Canada. I mentioned some of them upthread. Firearms in Canada are only used for hunting and target shooting, both legitimate sports. This has nothing to do with "an 18th century right", as you put it.
https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms
This is where the anti-gunner's "we don't want to take all your guns, just the really dangerous ones" argument falls apart. A year ago, there was nothing wrong with Canada's gun laws. I could even have moved there and lived with them. Now, because of an illegally smuggled gun, used by a prohibited person was used to kill some people in Nova Scotia, they de facto banned rifles that only had 5 round magazines and were semi-automatic. The latest is since there were rifle killings in the US, they want to stop the sale of handguns. Where is the logic in that?

johns624 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Reading the news stories, it seems like they are concerned with people smuggling illegal guns across the border. How will stopping the sale of legal guns impact this? I can understand putting more resources to border enforcement but I don't understand the rest. I've never heard of many (if any) legal Canadian guns finding their way into criminal hands.

But it's not zero sum. There is no loss in better regulating legal firearms at the same time as increasing resources to address gun smuggling from lax countries if your focus is on need and public safety rather than an 18th century "right".

Wrong. Why does something that is already highly regulated need to be even more regulated if there isn't a current problem with it. It appears that you don't know the regulations of "Restricted Firearms" in Canada. I mentioned some of them upthread. Firearms in Canada are only used for hunting and target shooting, both legitimate sports. This has nothing to do with "an 18th century right", as you put it.
https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms

I still don't understand why there is a problem with better regulation of legal firearms at the same time as trying to address smuggling.

The proposed measures appear entirely reasonsable to me.

Kent350787 wrote:

I still don't understand why there is a problem with better regulation of legal firearms at the same time as trying to address smuggling.

The proposed measures appear entirely reasonsable to me.

Did you even read what the current regulations are? The new law will regulate them out of existence.

johns624 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

I still don't understand why there is a problem with better regulation of legal firearms at the same time as trying to address smuggling.

The proposed measures appear entirely reasonsable to me.

Did you even read what the current regulations are? The new law will regulate them out of existence.

And? Why do individuals in Canada need the firearm?

Here in Australia, legal handguns outside policing/security are explicitly linked to membership of and training at registered gun clubs, with storage in approved gun safes. Would it be a big issue if the sport withered away - not for my mind.

johns624 wrote:

AirKevin wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Even today Canadians can only take their handgun to and from a recognized range. It is illegal to use them for hunting. You have to call and get permission from the CFO to take it to a gunsmith for repair or any other location than to the range. If you take it to the range, you can't make any stops or deviations to and from.

Stupid question. Suppose your car breaks down en route. Would you then be in violation.

Technically yes.

So what do you do then.

AirKevin wrote:

johns624 wrote:

AirKevin wrote:

Stupid question. Suppose your car breaks down en route. Would you then be in violation.

Technically yes.

So what do you do then.

Unless you actively sabotaged your vehicle to breakdown, what law enforcement official will press charges in this instance. There's abviously no intention to break the law in this instance.

Laws can't be written to take in to account every single possibility that could arise.

Kent350787 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

I still don't understand why there is a problem with better regulation of legal firearms at the same time as trying to address smuggling.

The proposed measures appear entirely reasonsable to me.

Did you even read what the current regulations are? The new law will regulate them out of existence.

And? Why do individuals in Canada need the firearm?

Here in Australia, legal handguns outside policing/security are explicitly linked to membership of and training at registered gun clubs, with storage in approved gun safes. Would it be a big issue if the sport withered away - not for my mind.

Maybe because people enjoy the sport and aren't hurting anyone? You have an irrational fear of guns; just admit it. Because you don't want something, you don't think anyone else should, either.

Airontario wrote:

AirKevin wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Technically yes.

So what do you do then.

Unless you actively sabotaged your vehicle to breakdown, what law enforcement official will press charges in this instance. There's abviously no intention to break the law in this instance.

Laws can't be written to take in to account every single possibility that could arise.

There's always that one cop...

johns624 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Did you even read what the current regulations are? The new law will regulate them out of existence.

And? Why do individuals in Canada need the firearm?

Here in Australia, legal handguns outside policing/security are explicitly linked to membership of and training at registered gun clubs, with storage in approved gun safes. Would it be a big issue if the sport withered away - not for my mind.

Maybe because people enjoy the sport and aren't hurting anyone? You have an irrational fear of guns; just admit it. Because you don't want something, you don't think anyone else should, either.

I grew up with guns. I had family and friends and neighbours with guns. I've seen how many rounds it takes to bring down a large feral pig that is heading towards your group. A friend of my wife's family was murdered by his daughter who was suffering mental issues after procedures failed at a local gun club (and were tightened statewide as a result). A neighbour that I knew well growing up was a President of the Clay Target Association in my state and still is President of his local club.

I have no problem with well regulated guns but, equally, see no strong need to retain access to a tool which can and does kill when procedures break down.

Kent350787 wrote:

I have no problem with well regulated guns but, equally, see no strong need to retain access to a tool which can and does kill when procedures break down.

BS. You say that and then say that you don't see anything wrong with Canada de facto banning handguns. You must know lousy shots if it takes a lot of shots to down a feral hog. Canadian guns and owners are already "well regulated".

johns624 wrote:

Airontario wrote:

AirKevin wrote:

So what do you do then.

Unless you actively sabotaged your vehicle to breakdown, what law enforcement official will press charges in this instance. There's abviously no intention to break the law in this instance.

Laws can't be written to take in to account every single possibility that could arise.

There's always that one cop...

I was about to say, I've seen stranger things happen before.

johns624 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Did you even read what the current regulations are? The new law will regulate them out of existence.

And? Why do individuals in Canada need the firearm?

Here in Australia, legal handguns outside policing/security are explicitly linked to membership of and training at registered gun clubs, with storage in approved gun safes. Would it be a big issue if the sport withered away - not for my mind.

Maybe because people enjoy the sport and aren't hurting anyone? You have an irrational fear of guns; just admit it. Because you don't want something, you don't think anyone else should, either.

This is the crux of the matter, that most US inhabitants don' want to admit: the laws about weapons, as they are (forget if they are too loose or too strict), are just inapplicable to every part of a country, which, like all countries (and more so than most), has changed drastically since those rights were first established now closing in on 300 years ago.

At that time, all states were rural overwhelmingly. 99% of people led the same quasi-frontier lifestyle, or outright frontier lifestyle in a huge continent whose wilderness had not been destroyed, like Europe already had been. Unlike Europe, America still had massive forest filled with dangerous creatures, but creatures that could also sustain families. And then there was the fact that conflict was ever present with the Natives who were rightfully outraged their lands were being systematically stolen. But for the most part, all regions of the country had a very similar lifestyle and societal structure.

Today, rural southern or western areas may retain that flavor of 300 years ago, and as such the people living in those areas not only have an appreciation and love for the rights of gun ownership, but a real need. People in Manhattan, Miami Beach, San Francisco, or a country home suburb have a completely different societal structure and way of life. For the people of the former to expect the people in the latter will accept or have the same notions of guns as themselves is irrational. And so is viceversa.

So you have an unsolvable problem on the legal front because you cannot craft legislation on this issue that will address the needs of both lifestyles. They are just too far apart now. Actually this issue is why you have crisis all over the Western Hemisphere, the countries have grown too large in the sense that regionalism is now finally starting to become evident, and increasingly, people are not so unified in their views because their way of life is drifting ever farther apart from a far flung region within their own nation.

NIKV69 wrote:

I never understood Canada but it seems the people there seem to be content with the government telling them what to do. To each their own.

The Government ARE the People....just like the US....it is called "Representation"

Civics 101.....

Derico wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

And? Why do individuals in Canada need the firearm?

Here in Australia, legal handguns outside policing/security are explicitly linked to membership of and training at registered gun clubs, with storage in approved gun safes. Would it be a big issue if the sport withered away - not for my mind.

Maybe because people enjoy the sport and aren't hurting anyone? You have an irrational fear of guns; just admit it. Because you don't want something, you don't think anyone else should, either.

This is the crux of the matter, that most US inhabitants don' want to admit: the laws about weapons, as they are (forget if they are too loose or too strict), are just inapplicable to every part of a country, which, like all countries (and more so than most), has changed drastically since those rights were first established now closing in on 300 years ago.

At that time, all states were rural overwhelmingly. 99% of people led the same quasi-frontier lifestyle, or outright frontier lifestyle in a huge continent whose wilderness had not been destroyed, like Europe already had been. Unlike Europe, America still had massive forest filled with dangerous creatures, but creatures that could also sustain families. And then there was the fact that conflict was ever present with the Natives who were rightfully outraged their lands were being systematically stolen. But for the most part, all regions of the country had a very similar lifestyle and societal structure.

Today, rural southern or western areas may retain that flavor of 300 years ago, and as such the people living in those areas not only have an appreciation and love for the rights of gun ownership, but a real need. People in Manhattan, Miami Beach, San Francisco, or a country home suburb have a completely different societal structure and way of life. For the people of the former to expect the people in the latter will accept or have the same notions of guns as themselves is irrational. And so is viceversa.

So you have an unsolvable problem on the legal front because you cannot craft legislation on this issue that will address the needs of both lifestyles. They are just too far apart now. Actually this issue is why you have crisis all over the Western Hemisphere, the countries have grown too large in the sense that regionalism is now finally starting to become evident, and increasingly, people are not so unified in their views because their way of life is drifting ever farther apart from a far flung region within their own nation.

300 years ago the fear was not wild critters...they ate them. The fear was a standing Federal Army...And the States protecting themselves from it....

Aaron747 wrote:

I have worked with Canadians in California and Japan, not in Canada.

Figured that. Expat Canadians are totally different and much better than those residing in the country. ESL teachers might be an exception, though.

ACDC8 wrote:

leader1 wrote:

but they’re among the flakiest people I’ve ever encountered. One of the many reasons I left that place was because of Canadians.

As an example?

And as a Canadian, trust me, I won't be offended - if there's one thing we Canucks do well, its laugh at ourselves

We have our fair share of folks who are against any form of gun control and anything and everything Liberal - mostly concentrated in Alberta which is pretty much our Texas. Newfoundland is kinda our Arkansas. Saskatchewan/Manitoba our Minnesota. BC is kind of Washington, Oregon, California all rolled up into one. Quebec is well, Quebec.

And without going too far off topic, I just want to say I absolutely love my American neighbours, no matter how whacky some of them are. My bucket list is to visit each and every State and Nevada is like a second home to me. Even just crossing the border into Bellingham, I'm happy there.

First things first, I am Canadian. I lived in Edmonton, Toronto and spent a lot of time in Montreal, but have basically been all over the country. Most of my family still lives up there and I go back and visit very often.

So, I'll focus this on people's attitudes up there.

The biggest irk for me was the anti-Americanism. It's a Canadian national sport. Almost like it exists as a way for Canadians to define themselves. Although I was born in the US, I still grew up in Canada and my dad was born and raised in Canada. And growing up, I was still treated like shit because of my birthplace. Every other group got exempted from criticism or prejudice (heck, bad behavior of other groups was often excused), except Americans and it was solely based on that identity. If that isn't xenophobia, I have no idea what is. Pretty hypocritical if you ask me, especially for a nation that prides itself on tolerance.

Second was the political correctness, which I found stifling. It was insane growing up. Not sure where you're located or your age, but in Edmonton, it was pretty bad. In school, we weren't even allowed to use the word "janitor" - they were "sanitation engineers". I kid you not. Toronto is way worse than Edmonton in that regard - it's woke city. I can't imagine how the overall atmosphere is with Trudeau as PM and Jagmeet Singh as his lieutenant.

And then, as polite and friendly as many Canadians are (so long as they didn't know where I was born), I just couldn't form deep friendships with them and my interactions with them were superficial. Most, if not all, of my friends up there were foreigners or people who might have been born in Canada, but considered themselves whatever ethnic group they were first instead of Canadian. I found those groups of people to be more reliable overall. In short, I simply couldn't click with the average Canadian.

Expat Canadians are different as they're more open-minded, have more outside experience and left for the reasons I did (which don't necessarily include the people), so I've gotten along with them a lot better.

Not to say that it's a bad place, because it isn't and there are some things I admire about the place - sane gun laws, for instance, and way less political polarization, although that seems to be changing - and I miss a lot of things about Canada. But yeah, at the end of the day, some characteristics of a lot of Canadians really irked the shit out of me.

leader1 wrote:

The biggest irk for me was the anti-Americanism. It's a Canadian national sport. Almost like it exists as a way for Canadians to define themselves. Although I was born in the US, I still grew up in Canada and my dad was born and raised in Canada. And growing up, I was still treated like shit because of my birthplace. Every other group got exempted from criticism or prejudice (heck, bad behavior of other groups was often excused), except Americans and it was solely based on that identity. If that isn't xenophobia, I have no idea what is. Pretty hypocritical if you ask me, especially for a nation that prides itself on tolerance.

I wouldn't say we're anti-American, but the attitude you're describing is kinda pretty much the same anywhere in the world - there's a reason why a lot of Americans put Canadian flags on their backpacks. I was in Italy this one time, wanted to store my luggage. Talked to the guy in a bit of broken Italian with a mix of English. Guy was totally ignorant and rude to me, showed him my Canadian passport - complete 180 in attitude. Americans have a certain reputation abroad and its not always a very positive one.

leader1 wrote:

Second was the political correctness, which I found stifling. It was insane growing up. Not sure where you're located or your age, but in Edmonton, it was pretty bad. In school, we weren't even allowed to use the word "janitor" - they were "sanitation engineers". I kid you not. Toronto is way worse than Edmonton in that regard - it's woke city. I can't imagine how the overall atmosphere is with Trudeau as PM and Jagmeet Singh as his lieutenant.

Edmonton woke? Yeah, not a chance. Vancouver and Toronto, sure, but Edmonton, yeah just no. And yes, I pretty much lived there between 2013 and 2018 and have lots of friends up there. I've lived in Canada (mostly BC) most my life and I've never heard or seen the term "sanitation engineer" used in day to day life other than on job postings and the odd advertisement. Political Correctness is a non-issue here in day to day life, even here in Vancouver. Your experience could very well be a company or institution policy, but certainly not a cultural view. You go up to UBC and their janitor's are part of the environmental services division, but if you ask for or call someone a janitor, no one will be offended or try to correct you.