cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/46886810
The American president has invited Canada to become his country’s “51st state,” an idea that has infuriated most of Canada’s 40 million citizens.
…
Hence this suggestion: Why not expand the EU to include Canada? Is that so far-fetched an idea? In any case, Canadians have actually considered the question themselves. In February 2025, a survey conducted by Abacus Data on a sample of 1,500 people found that 44% of those polled supported the idea, compared to 34% who opposed it. Better the 28th EU country than the 51st US state!
One might object: Canada is not European, as required for EU membership by Article 49 of the EU Treaty. But what does “European” actually mean? The word cannot be understood in a strictly geographic sense, or Cyprus, closer to Asia, would not be part of the EU. So the term must be understood in a cultural sense.
…
As [Canadian Prime Minister Mark] Carney said in Paris, in March: Thanks to its French and British roots, Canada is “the most European of non-European countries.” He speaks from experience, having served as governor of the Bank of England (a post that is assigned based on merit, not nationality). Culturally and ideologically, Canada is close to European democracies: It shares the same belief in the welfare state, the same commitment to multilateralism and the same rejection of the death penalty or uncontrolled firearms.
Moreover, Canada is a Commonwealth monarchy that shares a king with the United Kingdom.
…
Even short of a formal application, it would be wiser for Ottawa to strengthen its ties with European democracies rather than with the Chinese regime. The temptation is there: Just before heading to Davos, Carney signed an agreement with Beijing to lower tariffs on electric vehicles imported from China.
…
Farmers serve a purpose. Guns don’t.
Varmint hunting involves firearms.
Edit: Just going to add that if our Wildlife Conservation Officers believe the use of these now prohibited rifles is the best defence against a grizzly bear than shouldn’t we have access to these same tools?
Do you live in an area where you’re at threat from grizzly bears?
No, but I certainly camp in such regions frequent enough where such a threat is serious. Hell last time I camped 40ish kilometres up a trail (crown land) with some friends and heard bears most of our night.
And yes, we got the fuck outta there quite quick but if we didn’t have our firearms things could’ve gone ugly.
So, you shot at the bears?
I never said that, not that it matters as it would have been self defence even if we had, but to satisfy your need we had shot away from the bears solely to make noise as a show of force and presence.
Not an uncommon practice hence why bear bangers exist.
So, you don’t need guns.
Deterrence is not a replacement for defence.
If you’re facing a predator that is larger than you are you going to gamble with your life with just bear spray and bear bangers?
Bear spray is very effective, probably more so than a gun, if you shit your pants at least at the sight of a bear (but usually it’s the other way around too).
As a European that just shakes his head about Muricas love for kill tools, you don’t need a gun as average person. For rare cases there are strictly regulated permits. But otherwise I’m very glad that I don’t have to fear being shot by MAGAts. Or have basically no school-shooting etc. I sometimes think you’re stuck in the middle age or wild western or something like that…