IPSC’s Last Stand: Shaping the Future of Firearms Policy

Description of Video: “CCFR Radio – Ep 143: MEGA EPISODE! So many clips, Libs losing it over CCFR, C-21 passes committee” available on the CCFR YouTube Channel.

Table of Contents


  • 1.1 Overview of the Issue
  • 1.2 Contextual Background

2.2 The Qualified Professional (QP) Perspective: Unpacking the Skills Gap in the Demise of IPSC in Canada

  • 2.1 The Intersection of STEM and Firearms Usage
  • 2.2 The Role of IPSC in 21st Century Public Safety, National Security & Resilience
    • 2.2.1 21st Century Counter-Terrorism and Public Safety Challenges
    • 2.2.2 21st Century Policing and the Role of IPSC
    • 2.2.3 21st Century Martial Law and IPSC’s Role in Resilience
    • 2.2.4 21st Century War on Terror and IPSC as a Training Tool
    • 2.2.5 Future Challenges and IPSC’s Contribution to Crisis Management

Communication Failures

  • 3.1 The Breakdown in Communication
  • 3.2 Bridging the Gap Between Qualified Professionals (QPs) and IPSC

IPSC’s Last Stand: A Plea for Canada’s Warrior Ethos and the Defense of a Nation’s Soul

  • 4.1 Warrior Ethos: A Cultural Expression
  • 4.2 National & International, Human, Civil, Political Rights & Freedoms legislation support and protect the rights of IPSC as a belief system, cultural practice and expression
    • 4.2.1 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
    • 4.2.2 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
    • 4.2.3 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
    • 4.2.4 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003)
    • 4.2.5 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
  • 4.3 IPSC’s Role in the Defence of the Nation

Beyond Opposition: The Essential Contributions and Potential Benefits of the IPSC in Public Safety and Social Cohesion

  • 5.1 IPSC’s Legal, Social, and Safety Roles
  • 5.2 Legal Regulation Already In Place
  • 5.3 Social Cohesion Enhancement
  • 5.4 Public Safety Education
  • 5.5 Real-World Experience Resource
  • 5.6 Enhancing the Value of IPSC as a Vetting Institution
  • 5.7 Regarding Damoff’s Examples
  • 5.8 Cultural Expression Rights Protected by Legislation
  • 5.9 Criminal Deterrence
  • 5.10 Law Enforcement Training

Exploring Influences Behind Opposition to IPSC: A Deep Dive into Individual Psychology and Societal Forces

  • 6.1 Towards a Constructive Dialogue and Informed Decision Making
    • 6.1.1 Personal Beliefs or Value
    • 6.1.2 Public Safety Concerns
    • 6.1.3 Political Considerations
    • 6.1.4 Misunderstanding or Lack of Familiarity
    • 6.1.5 Larger Goals Or Agendas
    • Gender Bias Potential #1
    • Gender Bias Potential #2
    • 6.1.6 Gender Dynamics Tension And Competition For Authority
    • 6.1.7 Ideological Beliefs and Evolving Societal Dynamics
    • 6.1.8 Data Useful For Firearms Rights Legislators
  • 6.2 Conclusion

Description of Video: Video titled “Kody Blois betrays constituents, ends IPSC in Canada” available on the CCFR YouTube Channel.


1.1. Overview of the Issue – In an era marked by rising tensions and complexities surrounding public safety and social cohesion, the role of organizations like the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) has never been more crucial or contentious. This comprehensive report aims to explore the dynamics, benefits, and opposing forces related to the IPSC in the Canadian context, inviting the reader on a journey of in-depth analysis and constructive dialogue.

1.2. Contextual Background – As we delve into this exploration, we will first highlight the intersection of Qualified Professionals (QPs) and firearms usage, underlining the skills gap in public safety and law enforcement. This discussion provides an essential backdrop for understanding the contributions of IPSC to public safety and social cohesion.

In the throes of opposing views, miscommunication often arises, creating a barrier that hinders mutual understanding. Therefore, we will then scrutinize the communication failures associated with this issue, offering potential strategies to bridge the gap.

In our most profound delve, we step into IPSC’s shoes, capturing their passionate plea to uphold Canada’s warrior ethos and the defense of a nation’s soul. This powerful narrative exemplifies the stakes at hand, emphasizing the role of IPSC in the larger cultural and social fabric of the nation.

Moving beyond the opposition, we probe deeper into the essential contributions and potential benefits of IPSC. Here, we underscore the legal, social, and safety roles of IPSC, shedding light on its potential to function as a robust vetting institution and a cornerstone of public safety.

Opposition to IPSC is multifaceted, influenced by individual psychology and societal forces. To gain a nuanced understanding of these opposition forces, we examine potential influences, drawing upon statistical data and societal dynamics. In particular, we explore the impact of gender biases and the evolving societal shifts on the debate.

Finally, with an understanding of the complexities of this issue, we aim to guide the discourse towards constructive dialogue and informed decision making. Our goal is to foster respect and understanding, acknowledging the diversity of perspectives involved, and recognizing that all viewpoints stem from a shared commitment to public safety and social cohesion.

As we turn the pages of this report, we invite readers to engage with an open mind, ready to question, probe, and critically examine the issues at hand. This journey is not just about dissecting a conflict; it is about paving the way for a better, safer future – a future where each voice matters, each perspective is valued, and every individual plays a part in shaping our collective destiny. The stakes are high, and as such, the journey requires courage, curiosity, and an unwavering commitment to dialogue and understanding.

Together, we stand at the precipice of a defining moment in our nation’s history. The choices we make, the dialogue we foster, and the understanding we cultivate will shape the future of public safety and social cohesion in Canada. As we delve into this complex issue, let us remember that at the heart of this discussion lies the soul of our nation. Let this report be a testament to our collective dedication to truth, understanding, and the pursuit of a safer, more united Canada.

The Qualifed Professionals (QPs) Perspective: Unpacking the Skills Gap and Communication Failures in the Demise of IPSC in Canada

Introduction – The debate surrounding the future of the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) in Canada is an intricate tapestry woven with threads of technology, policy, communication, and public sentiment. Analyzing this from a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) perspective helps us to uncover the intricacies of the issue, while identifying the skills gap and communication failures that have exacerbated the challenges.

2.1. The Intersection of STEM and Firearms Usage

From a STEM standpoint, the technical aspects of shooting sports, including the mechanics of firearms, safety measures, and precision engineering, all play a critical role. With the potential demise of the IPSC, there’s a risk of losing the associated technical and engineering skills that are part of this sport.Beyond the sport itself, these skills can be transferable to a variety of professional areas within the STEM field. Discouraging the IPSC could inadvertently contribute to a wider skills gap in Canada, as these areas of expertise are often overlooked in traditional educational settings. Moreover, the practical problem-solving abilities developed through the sport, when transferred to STEM areas, can promote innovation and advancement.

2.2 The Role of IPSC in 21st Century Public Safety, National Security & Resilience

In the context of 21st-century challenges in public safety, security, and resilience, the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) emerges as a critical skill-building platform for various professional sectors, including law enforcement, military, security agencies, and emergency response teams. By leveraging the unique characteristics of IPSC, such as its focus on precision shooting, problem-solving under pressure, and adherence to strict safety protocols, these sectors can enhance their capabilities to address the evolving threats and crises of the modern world.

2.2.1 21st Century Counter-Terrorism and Public Safety Challenges

Counter-terrorism efforts in the 21st century have become increasingly complex and multifaceted, with non-state actors utilizing asymmetric warfare strategies, unconventional tactics, and emerging technologies. Law enforcement and security agencies are tasked with countering these threats while ensuring the safety of civilians and protecting critical infrastructure.

IPSC can play a vital role in preparing and equipping professionals to face these challenges. The rigorous training and competitive nature of IPSC foster a mindset of continuous improvement, discipline, and adaptability. Participants develop not only marksmanship skills but also decision-making abilities, situational awareness, and effective communication under stress. These skills are invaluable in counter-terrorism operations, where split-second judgments and precise execution are essential.

2.2.2 21st Century Policing and the Role of IPSC

21st-century policing requires officers to possess a diverse skill set that goes beyond traditional law enforcement duties. IPSC provides an ideal training ground for law enforcement personnel, enabling them to develop and maintain proficiency in firearms handling, shooting accuracy, and tactical decision-making. By participating in IPSC competitions and training, officers can improve their marksmanship, speed, and agility, allowing them to respond effectively to high-stress situations, such as active shooter incidents or armed confrontations.

Moreover, IPSC fosters a culture of responsibility and accountability among law enforcement personnel. The emphasis on safety protocols, adherence to rules, and ethical conduct helps instill a sense of professionalism and integrity in officers, contributing to public trust and confidence in law enforcement agencies.

2.2.3 21st Century Martial Law and IPSC’s Role in Resilience

In scenarios involving martial law or other extraordinary circumstances, where the military or security forces are required to maintain order and protect citizens, the skills acquired through IPSC can be invaluable. IPSC participants, including military personnel and reservists, gain practical experience in firearms handling, marksmanship, and tactical decision-making that can be directly applied in situations where security and stability are paramount.

The precision shooting techniques and problem-solving abilities honed through IPSC enable military and security personnel to respond effectively to threats, mitigate risks, and protect civilians. Furthermore, the competitive nature of IPSC fosters resilience, mental fortitude, and the ability to perform under pressure – qualities that are essential in crisis situations.

2.2.4 21st Century War on Terror and IPSC as a Training Tool

The 21st-century war on terror encompasses a wide range of asymmetric threats, including guerrilla warfare, insurgency, and terrorism. Military forces and intelligence agencies are tasked with gathering intelligence, conducting operations, and countering these threats while minimizing civilian casualties and collateral damage.

IPSC can serve as a valuable training tool in this context. By simulating realistic scenarios and emphasizing precision shooting, IPSC allows military and intelligence personnel to sharpen their skills in a controlled environment. IPSC competitions and training exercises can replicate the complexities of urban warfare, close-quarter combat, and dynamic threat environments, enabling participants to develop the tactical acumen and decision-making capabilities needed in the war on terror.

2.2.5 Future Challenges and IPSC’s Contribution to Crisis Management

Looking ahead to the next 50 years, it is evident that humanity will face a myriad of challenges and crises. From natural disasters and pandemics to cyber-attacks and geopolitical tensions, the ability to effectively manage and respond to these crises will be paramount.

IPSC, with its focus on skill development, discipline, and situational awareness, can contribute to crisis management efforts. The problem-solving abilities, stress resistance, and marksmanship skills cultivated through IPSC training can aid emergency response teams, disaster relief organizations, and security agencies in effectively mitigating the impact of crises and protecting lives.

By integrating IPSC training and principles into the skill sets of frontline workers, such as police officers, paramedics, and firefighters, the overall resilience and preparedness of these professionals can be enhanced. The ability to think critically, act decisively, and maintain composure under pressure are all traits that IPSC can instill, making individuals and organizations better equipped to navigate the challenges of the future.

Furthermore, the IPSC community’s extensive expertise and commitment to responsible firearms usage position it as a potential resource for crisis management and security agencies. The knowledge and experience of IPSC participants can be harnessed to provide valuable insights, training, and support during times of crisis, thereby bolstering overall response capabilities.

In conclusion, the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) holds significant potential in shaping 21st-century public safety, security, and resilience. As a platform for skill development, IPSC equips professionals in law enforcement, military, and security agencies with the necessary tools to address evolving threats. By integrating the principles and training methodologies of IPSC, these sectors can enhance their capabilities to counter terrorism, ensure public safety, and effectively respond to crises. As the world faces an increasingly complex and uncertain future, IPSC’s contribution to skill-building, resilience, and crisis management will become increasingly valuable, reinforcing the fabric of public safety and security in the 21st century.

Communication Failures

3.1. The Breakdown in Communication

As demonstrated in the parliamentary discourse, the communication surrounding the fate of IPSC in Canada has been plagued with complexities and misunderstandings. There is a clear disconnect between policy-makers and the community of IPSC enthusiasts, as well as a lack of mutual understanding. It is also evident that there’s a failure in effectively communicating the Qualified Professional (QP)-related benefits associated with the IPSC, further complicating the scenario.

The intricacies of the issue, combined with a lack of clear, comprehensive communication, have resulted in a polarized debate. This divide undermines the potential for a balanced dialogue and hinders the development of a solution that respects the rights of gun owners while ensuring public safety.

3.2 Bridging the Gap Between STEM and IPSC

To bridge the communication gap, efforts need to be made to foster informed, balanced, and respectful discussions. Better education about the STEM aspects of IPSC, the potential skills gap, and the technical nuances of firearm use and safety could help to form a more informed decision-making process.In addition, more transparent and inclusive communication could help to demystify the sport, mitigate biases, and promote a better understanding of its implications. This would be a critical step towards creating a compromise that takes into account public safety, while also considering the potential societal benefits of IPSC, including its contribution to the STEM skill set in Canada.


The narrative surrounding the potential demise of the IPSC in Canada provides an instructive case study about the interplay between Qualified Professionals (QPs), communication, and policy-making. While the outcome remains uncertain, a Qualified Professionals (QPs) perspective brings to light some under-explored dimensions of the issue. Understanding these complexities and improving communication can potentially lead to more constructive dialogue and sustainable decision-making.

This report should be considered a starting point for further investigation, aiming to deepen our understanding of the intersection between Qualified Professionals (QPs), policy-making, and societal issues.

IPSC’s Last Stand: A Plea for Canada’s Warrior Ethos and the Defense of a Nation’s Soul

“As a new member of IPSC, it was my dream to have a Black Badge. I’ve waited since the age of 7. I feel utterly crucified as a warrior soul with this decision. I trusted in Canada so badly. I recently came across news surrounding the death of International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) in Canada, I can’t even comprehend the news, it’s so terrible sounding, and this has raised with my colleagues and I, some deep-seated concerns. I firmly believe this sport plays a crucial role in safeguarding Canada’s warrior ethos, a concept that has fortified our nation and its leaders for centuries.

The Warrior Ethos: A Cultural Expression – The spirit of courage, fearlessness, and nobility – is not a mere characteristic. It is a fundamental component of our societal fabric, birthing leaders who rise during adversity, exemplifying resilience, strength, and steadfast will. The current situation of IPSC seems less like policy changes and more like politically motivated attempts to suppress a significant part of our history.

Historically, societies from European kingdoms to Eastern empires, like India and Japan, held their warrior leaders in high esteem, acknowledging their importance in societal stability and progress. The removal of IPSC now, amidst rumours of foreign interference and burgeoning supranational public-private partnerships challenging the authority and sovereignty of nation states, seems less a public safety project and more a political maneuver to suppress a specific group of citizens.

The recent measures against IPSC seem to target individuals who, driven by a belief system, may emerge as leaders embodying the warrior ethos. It feels like an attempt to legally expunge a belief system, a quintessentially Canadian one, contradicting the fundamental aspirations of freedom cherished by Canadians and Americans alike.

The issue goes beyond opposition to IPSC or sports shooting. The essence lies in the freedom to uphold the warrior ethos, the spirit of courage, resilience, and nobility. I am confident that the public would not endorse a ban aimed at extinguishing this spirit, a defining characteristic of our national character and our leaders. The mature members of the public, at the very least.

“IPSC represents a nuanced part of our society, touching on social, cultural, ethical, historical, and legal dimensions.

Socially, IPSC fosters community, encourages responsibility, discipline, and safety norms. These are starting to dwindle in Canada. Support mechanisms of value systems such as IPSC offer a way to support eroding value system of next generation citizens. It offers a constructive outlet for individuals passionate about firearms and marksmanship, ensuring such interests are pursued responsibly and lawfully.

Culturally, IPSC helps keep the ‘warrior ethos’ alive, contributing to our cultural heritage. The ethos, emphasizing bravery, skill, honor, the code of behaviour and resilience, has historical roots in various societies, including Canada.

National & International, Human, Civil, Political Rights & Freedoms legislation protect rights of IPSC as a belief system, cultural practice and expression – From an ethical perspective, the right to participate in IPSC should be respected as part of broader rights to freedom of thought, belief, and expression. These rights, protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, view the removal of IPSC as an attempt at cultural erasure or suppression of a belief system.

Historically, IPSC has played a crucial role in societies, providing a platform for leadership skills, bravery, and fostering a sense of community and mutual support. It has also served as a means of preserving history and tradition, fostering continuity and belonging.

“The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects freedom of thought, belief, and expression, which encompasses activities like IPSC. Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication”. This legal protection can support the freedom to engage in activities like IPSC as part of one’s belief system and cultural expression.

“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights – Article 18 guarantees freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Article 19 also protects the right to freedom of opinion and expression. These are cornerstone principles that support the freedom to engage in cultural activities and express oneself through those activities.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also provide protection for these freedoms on an international level.

4. Additionally, the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003) underscores the importance of preserving cultural activities and traditions, which provides further grounds for defending IPSC. This international treaty emphasizes the importance of protecting and preserving cultural activities and traditions that constitute the intangible cultural heritage of societies. While the “warrior ethos” and related activities might not be officially recognized as part of this heritage, the general principle of safeguarding cultural practices aligns with the idea of preserving such a tradition.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): Article 18 protects the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Article 19 safeguards the right to hold opinions without interference and the right to freedom of expression. These principles support the freedom to engage in cultural activities that are part of one’s belief system and to express oneself through these activities.”

It is important to note that these rights can be subject to limitations necessary for public safety. In IPSC’s case, it’s crucial to convincingly demonstrate that this activity doesn’t pose a threat to public safety and that its removal represents an undue infringement on protected rights and freedoms. The Liberal Party has not demonstrated a history of IPSC causing a public safety danger that is real at the national, but not even on provincial scale, city scale, or even at the level of statistics of.. have there been any? you would destroy warrior ethos for 1 or no crimes? Is there madness going on here? The suppression of IPSC contradicts principles of diversity, inclusivity, and freedom of expression.

4.3. IPSC’s Role in the Defence of the Nation

IPSC is more than a sport; it’s a symbol of societal resilience and courage, carrying significant social, cultural, ethical, historical, and legal implications. Its removal would not merely impact a sport; it would curtail a belief system and restrict the expression of a warrior ethos that has been integral to Canadian culture and leadership. As such, I urge you and the Conservative Team to consider the broader implications of this issue and take appropriate action to safeguard this aspect of our national identity.

The warrior ethos, deeply embedded within the fabric of IPSC, is the very essence of leadership and resilience that our society needs in times of great adversity. Upholding it is not just about preserving a sport or a tradition, but about preserving a spirit that underpins the identity of our nation and its people. – This is your chance Canada. To set things right between those who oppress the next generation very much, Millenials and Gen Z, well the list is too long to describe. This is your chance to fight for heroes and for everyone else too.

Beyond Opposition: The Essential Contributions and Potential Benefits of the IPSC in Public Safety and Social Cohesion

5.1. IPSC’s Legal, Social, and Safety Roles We are writing to express our concerns regarding the potential legislation affecting International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC). The opposition Pam Damoff has expressed towards IPSC, we believe, deserves a more thorough examination from several perspectives: legal, social, public safety, and the influence of real-world experiences. After an examination of the arguments presented, we believe that there are several aspects that warrant deeper consideration.

5.2 Legal Regulation Already In Place The IPSC in Canada is already heavily regulated. IPSC activities are conducted within the framework of Canadian law. Participants undergo intensive training, and all firearms utilized must comply with the strict Canadian firearms laws. These safety measures are in place to ensure the safety of both participants and the public.

5.3 Social Cohesion Enhancement IPSC, as a community, brings together individuals passionate about firearms and shooting sports. It not only provides a crucial support network but also fosters responsible firearm usage and contributes to social cohesion.

5.4 Public Safety Education The IPSC community is composed of highly trained individuals who possess deep knowledge of firearm safety. Their expertise contributes to public safety, given their proficiency in handling firearms responsibly and their ability to educate others about safe handling practices.

5.5 Real-World Experience Resource Many IPSC participants have law enforcement or military backgrounds, offering a firsthand understanding of firearm safety and commitment to responsible firearm usage. This real-world experience is an invaluable resource in discussions around firearms regulation.

5.5 Enhancing the Value of IPSC as a Vetting Institution With its community’s extensive expertise, IPSC has the potential to function as a robust vetting institution. By capitalizing on the deep understanding of its members, IPSC can effectively identify and screen individuals who may pose a risk. Consequently, even with increased registration rates in the sport, new users would automatically become part of an ongoing monitoring and vetting network comprised of professionals. This perpetual network would provide an additional layer of protection, serving as a safety net and reinforcing the continuous vetting process, in addition to the standard safeguards provided by the law and the police.

5.6 Regarding Damoff’s Example It is important to note that she presents a single case rather than a comprehensive dataset of 1,000 cases or 10,000 cases. Therefore, drawing any conclusive judgments from her arguments becomes impossible.

5.7 Cultural Expression Rights Supported by Legislation Many members of the IPSC community subscribe to the ‘warrior ethos,’ a commitment to discipline, skill, and community safety that forms a significant part of their identities. It is essential to respect this ethos when formulating policy decisions.

5.8 Criminal Deterrence The IPSC community, consisting of law enforcement personnel, military officers, and highly trained civilian shooters, can serve as a significant deterrent to potential criminals.

5.9 Law Enforcement Training: IPSC serves as an excellent training ground for law enforcement and military personnel. The controlled environment it provides allows for the improvement of shooting skills and familiarity with various types of firearms, thereby enhancing field effectiveness, further increasing officer safety and public safety during moments of crisis and crime.

Through the exploration of these perspectives, it becomes clear that the IPSC offers significant potential benefits in the context of public safety. Furthermore, it appears that Damoff’s stance might be influenced by certain misconceptions or biases against the IPSC, potentially stemming from a lack of understanding of its role and contributions.

Exploring Influences Behind Opposition to IPSC: A Deep Dive into Individual Psychology and Societal Forces

6.1.8 Conclusion

6.1 Towards a Constructive Dialogue and Informed Decision Making From a psychological perspective, it’s difficult to precisely pinpoint the motivations behind someone’s actions or positions without direct input from that individual, or without a comprehensive understanding of their history, values, beliefs, and experiences. In this context, we can, however, speculate on some possible factors that may influence Damoff’s position against IPSC.

6.1.1 Personal Beliefs or Values Damoff might harbour strong personal beliefs against firearms or the concept of an active firearms community. This could stem from various sources, such as personal experiences, cultural upbringing, or deeply ingrained values.

6.1.2 Public Safety Concerns It’s also possible that Damoff genuinely perceives the existence of an active firearms community as a risk to public safety. Her concerns might be driven by the notion that easier access to firearms could increase the likelihood of accidents or misuse.

6.1.3 Political Considerations Like any legislator, Damoff is accountable to her constituents, and her stance might reflect the views of those she represents. If there’s a significant proportion of her constituents who are against the idea of a robust firearms community, her position could be a political response to those sentiments.

6.1.4 Misunderstanding or Lack of Familiarity It’s possible that Damoff doesn’t fully understand the nuances of IPSC, the benefits it can bring, or the measures it has in place to ensure safety and to increase safety. This could lead to a bias against the organization.

6.1.5. Larger Goals Or Agendas Damoff could view the curtailment of IPSC as a stepping stone towards larger legislative goals, such as broader gun control measures.

6.1.6 Gender Dynamics Tension And Competition For Authority A potential tension exists in the discourse around firearms policy, seemingly fueled by underlying gender dynamics. This dynamic is particularly pronounced in certain politically charged environments such as Victoria, BC. One side of the debate comprises mainly male military officers, conservatives, and firearms enthusiasts advocating for practices like IPSC. Conversely, a predominantly female group of administrators, typically leaning left politically, voices opposition to these practices. This dichotomy may suggest that broader social forces, including gender dynamics, might enhance the tenacity of the disagreements in the discussion. Gender Bias Potential #1: “The General Social Survey (GSS) conducted in the United States has included questions about firearm ownership and attitudes towards gun control. According to data from the GSS, there have been differences in firearm ownership rates and attitudes towards gun control between men and women. Historically, men have been more likely to own firearms and support gun rights compared to women.” Gender Bias Potential #2: “Other surveys, such as those conducted by Pew Research Center, have also examined gender differences in attitudes towards firearms. Their research suggests that men are more likely to own firearms and express support for gun rights compared to women. However, it’s worth emphasizing that these findings are based on aggregate data and do not reflect the perspectives of every man or woman.”

6.1.7 Ideological Beliefs and Evolving Societal Dynamics Concurrent with the observed gender dynamics, ideological beliefs, too, appear to be contributing to the tension in the debate around firearms policy. The contrasting ideologies – conservatives advocating for IPSC and left-leaning administrators opposing it – might be creating a potential barrier to neutrality in the discussion. Furthermore, as society undergoes shifts in gender roles and power dynamics, it’s plausible that these evolving societal changes could be influencing the intensity and direction of the debate on firearms policy.

As we navigate the complex landscapes of individual psychology, political motivations, and societal forces, it becomes increasingly clear that the opposition towards the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) is multifaceted and deeply rooted in larger social narratives. From personal values and public safety concerns to political pressures and gender dynamics, the factors influencing this opposition weave a complex tapestry that warrants further exploration and dialogue.

Understanding this complexity can inform more nuanced conversations about the future of IPSC, facilitate constructive dialogue between opposing parties, and ultimately contribute to more effective policy decisions. It is crucial, therefore, that we continue to question, probe, and critically examine the underlying influences shaping this contentious debate. As we move forward, let us commit to fostering an environment of respect and understanding that honours the complexity of this issue and the diversity of perspectives involved.

6.1.8 Data Useful For Firearms Rights Legislators

Description: This is relevant data that might be useful to firearms rights legislators, so we thought to deploy it to the web, in the spirit of co-operation and common understanding:

In the discourse surrounding firearm legislation, we, the members of the firearms community, have been labeled by critics like Damoff as lacking understanding of the pain of death, pain of loneliness, pain of death of a loved one, and so forth and possibly an accusation of our irresponsible notion as pertaining to public safety. How about the pain of a dying mother in a jail for 50 years, is that not greater, to die every hour eternally? Pam, there are great struggles people face, do not act the way you do, it’s not authentic. Obviously, Damoff believes these are the greatest pains, that people do not suffer, and will never suffer pains greater than these. I do not agree. The depth of pain one can suffer is infinitely strong and can be higher than this, and often is. This characterization is not only grossly inaccurate but also deeply distressing. It paints a false image of our community, suggesting a cavalier attitude towards life and safety, which couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Damoff’s portrayal of our stance is far from authentic. Her dramatized expressions, infused with unconvincing sorrow and disappointment, reveal an actor rather than a genuine critic. She implies that we are incapable of defending our beliefs before a grieving family, a portrayal that is simply incorrect.

Consider the following: Could Damoff herself stand before a thousand families of fallen soldiers and assert that their sacrifices were in vain? This is the kind of strength you need, if you want to defend life around you, a strength which Pam does not have. This is not a belittlement of the tragedies endured by grieving families but a testament to the courage of our convictions. We are just as aware of the gravity of death and violence as we are committed to the principles of respect for life, safety, and responsible firearms use. And we would be willing to wager that many members of the firearms community and citizens in Canada, have indeed experienced equivalent pain to the pain of death of a loved one, or the lack of love, the lack of loyalty, the pain of betrayal by those held most deal and on and on into the darkness of pain, we all know what it is Pam. Only you don’t. Even living in a country with poor leaders such as Pam Damoff, and the resulting damages to the lives of others as a result of the manifestation of the consequences of the actions of such leaders, we experience the pain of death often Pam, and we transcend it, by standing up to people like you, and that is why we are positive and everlasting.

In defense of our position, I would like to draw your attention to several historical instances where severe gun control, confiscations, and bans correlated with acts of violence and genocide:

Ottoman Empire (1915-1917): Armenian population disarmed prior to the Armenian Genocide.

Soviet Union (1929-1953): Strict gun control during the Great Purge.

Nazi Germany (1938): Gun control laws enforced prior to the Holocaust.

China (1948): Strict gun control during the Chinese Civil War.

Guatemala (1960-1996): Strict gun control laws enacted in 1964 followed by a brutal civil war.

Uganda (1971-1979): Gun control during a period characterized by human rights abuses.

Cambodia (1975-1979): Gun control policies enforced before the Cambodian genocide.

Sudan (1983-2005): Strict gun control during the Second Sudanese Civil War.

Rwanda (1994): Restrictive gun control laws enacted prior to the Rwandan genocide.

Yugoslavia (1992-1995): Gun control policies in place prior to and during the Bosnian War.

Zaire (1971-1997): Strict gun control laws during Mobutu Sese Seko’s regime.

Sierra Leone (1991-2002): Stringent gun control during the Sierra Leone Civil War.

Liberia (1989-2003): Gun control measures during a period of civil war under Charles Taylor’s regime.

North Korea (1948-Present): Strict gun control enforced since its inception.

Venezuela (2012-Present): Gun control laws enacted leading to economic collapse and widespread violence.

Ethiopia (1974-1991): Strict gun control during the Derg regime in Ethiopia.

East Timor (1975-1999): Indonesia enforced gun control in East Timor during its occupation.

Iraq (1979-2003): Strict gun control laws during Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship.

Albania (1944-1992): Stringent gun control during Enver Hoxha’s communist regime.

Afghanistan (1978-Present): Successive regimes enforcing strict gun control.

Who knows how many examples there actually exist pertaining to power differentials in society enforced by the administrative class, that ironically do not have a good understanding of public safety context, and scope assessment, always seemingly dismissing the agents of authority as a potential causation of violence and bad action.

While correlation does not equate to causation, these examples underscore the necessity for a balanced, nuanced, and informed approach when discussing firearm regulation. As part of the firearms community, we implore Damoff and others to look beyond preconceived notions and engage in a dialogue that promotes understanding and respect for firearms rights advocates and responsible firearms owners, similar to the respect that is expected of all citizens towards one another.

6.1.8 Conclusion

In our journey through this report, we have examined the complexities, opportunities, and obstacles related to the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) and the broader discourse around firearms policy. It is here, in the conclusion, where we gather our findings, insights, and inspirations to illuminate a path forward – a path that respects individual rights, upholds public safety, fosters skill development, and advocates for effective communication.

Firstly, we must remember that the intersection of Qualified Professionals (QPs) and firearms usage represents a critical opportunity for skill development in public safety and law enforcement sectors. A shortage of these crucial skills can jeopardize our safety and security, and institutions like the IPSC play a key role in filling this gap.

Secondly, it is crucial to acknowledge that, beneath the surface of opposition to IPSC, we’ve discovered a complex landscape of psychological and societal forces. This complexity should not be a source of division but rather a call to cultivate greater understanding, empathy, and dialogue. IPSC’s contribution to maintaining a balance of authority is instrumental, and the diversity of the IPSC community should be seen as an asset rather than a liability.

Our exploration of the warrior ethos – a steadfast commitment to discipline, skill, and community safety – illuminated the intrinsic human desire to protect, defend, and uphold societal values. This ethos, as practised and embodied by the IPSC, is not a threat but rather a defense of a nation’s soul, representing a significant part of Canadian identity that warrants recognition and respect.

The potential of IPSC to function as a robust vetting institution is one of its most significant contributions to public safety. By leveraging the deep understanding of its community, the IPSC can effectively identify and mitigate potential threats, thereby reinforcing public safety measures already in place.

In the face of communication failures, we’ve seen the potential for constructive dialogue and informed decision-making. Bridging the communication gap, while a challenging endeavor, can bring us closer to a mutual understanding and a balanced approach to firearm policies that respects the rights of all citizens.

As we close this chapter of our examination, we carry with us a call to action – a plea for continued dialogue, respect for diversity of thought, and a shared commitment to public safety and individual rights. In our defense of these ideals, we stand as heroes – not just for the IPSC, but for every Canadian citizen whose voice deserves to be heard, whose rights need protection, and whose safety is our collective responsibility.

In the face of adversity, we do not falter. We rise, not just as individuals, but as a united community. Let us stand firm in our resolve to shape the future of firearms policy – a future where public safety, individual rights, and the warrior ethos coexist and complement each other, further enriching the fabric of our society.

This is IPSC’s last stand, but it is also the dawn of a new era – an era where we foster understanding, champion individual rights, ensure public safety, and most importantly, where we all rise together.

Dedication: “This report stands as a testament to resilience, unity, and the indomitable spirit of those who dare to uphold their beliefs against all odds. It is dedicated to Lucas Botkin (and also to Isaac Botkin, Garand Thumb, Tactical Hyve and Mike Glover), the torchbearers of the warrior ethos, who, amidst the turbulence of life, reminded me of the power of this ethos.

Their story became my beacon, illuminating the path out of darkness, reminding me to fight through the clenches of death and to rekindle the flame of life. They stood as steadfast symbols of courage, reflecting the perseverance of warriors who refuse to succumb in the face of adversity.

“In the face of overwhelming forces, their resilience urged me to rise once again, to embrace my warrior spirit and to live by it, fearless and undeterred. It was through their journey that I understood the weight of the human spirit and the transformative power it holds to change the world around us. Their inspiration fueled the creation of this report, igniting a passion within me to protect the freedom and rights of the International Practical Shooting Confederation and every citizen it represents.

As this report reaches the hands of policymakers, legislators, and the people, it is my hope that it carries forth the spirit of Lucas Botkin and his brother – a spirit of resilience, unity, and unfaltering conviction. May their inspiration become a beacon for us all, reminding us of our warrior ethos and our inherent strength to stand, fight, and live with courage.

This report, like the warrior ethos it champions, stands as a bulwark against the turbulent waves of foreign alliances seeking to subvert Canada and its citizens. For if we falter, if we let this last sanctuary on Earth crumble, then we forsake not just the IPSC but the very ideals we hold dear – the freedom, rights, and safety of our people.

And so, we stand on the shoulders of Lucas Botkin, Isaac Botkin, and every warrior who dares to resist, to ensure that this sanctuary – our home, our Canada – remains unyielding in the face of adversity. For it is in our unity, our shared ethos, that we will weather the storm and secure a future where the rights and safety of our citizens remain our paramount concern.

“In the end, the fate of this little organization, and the world, rests on us. Let us rise, together, to meet the dawn of a new era.

Related Content:

YouTube Clip Title: “On Pierre Poilievre’s YouTube channel, titled “Erase the past, control the future”.

Description: “The real reason Trudeau wants to erase our heroes and history from the passport. And why we will stop him. And bring home the Canada we love.” – Pierre Poilievre, YouTube Channel

The main theme of this transcript seems to revolve around the host’s concern over changes to Canada’s passport design, which he views as a symbol of a broader effort by Prime Minister Trudeau’s government to “erase” or “rewrite” Canada’s history. The host uses the changes on the passport to weave a narrative of Trudeau allegedly downplaying Canada’s historical figures and achievements.

To analyze this, let’s break it down into several parts:

  1. Removal of symbols and figures: The host is upset about the removal of Canadian icons such as Terry Fox, the Vimy Memorial, and the Parliament buildings from the passport design. He also references the removal of Nellie McClung, one of the “Famous Five” women who fought for women’s rights in Canada, as particularly egregious given Trudeau’s self-proclaimed feminism.
  2. Admiration of dictatorships: The host refers to past statements by Trudeau expressing admiration for China’s “basic dictatorship” and Fidel Castro’s leadership, suggesting that this admiration is informing his approach to governance in Canada. This is a critique often levied by some of Trudeau’s critics, who argue that his expressed admiration for these figures reflects a disregard for democratic norms.
  3. Censorship: The host suggests that Trudeau’s government is seeking to control what Canadians can see and say, citing a controversial online censorship bill. Margaret Atwood, a well-known Canadian author, is quoted expressing concerns about the bill.
  4. Narrative of a ‘blank slate’: The host suggests that by erasing elements of Canada’s history, Trudeau is attempting to justify a complete reshaping of the country according to his vision. The host draws a parallel with George Orwell’s concept of “reality control,” where the past is altered to control the present and future.
  5. Downplaying of heroes and achievements: The host alleges that Trudeau’s government is suppressing recognition of Canadian heroes and achievements in an effort to present Canada as needing radical change.

In terms of historical parallels, these claims echo concerns often raised during times of social and political change. The French Revolution, Russian Revolution, and Cultural Revolution in China all involved efforts to rewrite national narratives and suppress or reframe historical figures and events. However, it’s important to note that these were revolutionary periods characterized by widespread violence and upheaval, whereas the context in Canada is far different.

While the host’s theory is not illegal per se, it invites legal and societal discourse regarding freedom of expression, right to information, and democratic norms within the Canadian legal framework. It’s crucial to remember that these are the host’s interpretations and assertions, and not necessarily universally accepted truths. As always, it’s important to consider multiple perspectives and sources when forming conclusions about such complex issues.

For reference purposes, and for the purposes of conveying this information to the next generation, here is very limited partial list with some historical examples where the removal or destruction of icons and cultural symbols occurred as a part of broader societal or political change:

  1. Russian Revolution (1917): The Bolsheviks eradicated symbols of the Russian Empire, destroying icons, monuments, and churches to establish a new Communist society.
  2. Cultural Revolution in China (1966-1976): Mao Zedong attacked traditional Chinese culture, leading to the destruction of historic artifacts, texts, and monuments. Intellectuals and cultural figures were also persecuted.
  3. Khmer Rouge rule in Cambodia (1975-1979): The regime led by Pol Pot eradicated symbols of old Cambodian culture, persecuted intellectuals, and restructured society into rural farming collectives.
  4. French Revolution (1789-1799): Revolutionaries destroyed symbols and images associated with the monarchy and the Catholic Church.
  5. Reign of Terror during the French Revolution (1793-1794): Religious icons and relics were destroyed as part of an anti-Catholic sentiment, and many churches were transformed into “Temples of Reason.”
  6. Nazi Germany (1933-1945): The Nazi party targeted symbols of non-Aryan cultures, particularly Jewish culture. Synagogues, Jewish businesses, and books that didn’t align with Nazi beliefs were destroyed.
  7. Italian Fascist Regime (1922-1943): Under Mussolini, Roman symbolism was used to draw parallels with the ancient Roman Empire. Cultural and historical artefacts that didn’t align with the regime’s ideology were destroyed or removed.
  8. Cultural changes during the Iranian Revolution (1979): The Islamic revolution led to the removal of many cultural symbols, especially those perceived as Western influences. Western symbols were removed and strict Islamic codes of dress and behaviour were enforced.
  9. Iraq under Saddam Hussein (1979-2003): Saddam used monumental architecture and imagery to construct a personality cult, while removing or minimizing other cultural and historical symbols.
  10. ISIS/Daesh in Iraq and Syria (2014-2017): This group destroyed many cultural and historical monuments, seeing them as idolatrous, and targeted various ethnic and religious communities.
  11. Iconoclasm during the Byzantine Empire (8th and 9th centuries): Religious icons were systematically destroyed due to theological disputes over their veneration.
  12. Taliban’s destruction of Buddhas of Bamiyan (2001): The monumental statues were considered idolatrous and destroyed by the extremist Islamic group.

In all of these cases, the removal or destruction of icons and cultural symbols was a significant part of a broader societal change, often accompanied by the persecution of intellectuals and those seen as opposing the new order.

YouTube Clip Title:Why is Justin Trudeau destroying so many Canadian icons, including our passport?”

Description:There is a pattern going on, and the pattern is not a shock, it’s what to be expected from Justin Trudeau. He is a one world socialist type of person, and the only way you can get to that is you have to remove the history of Canada,’ said Manny Montenegrino.” – Rebel News, YouTube Channel

The “removal of icons” theory suggested in the video refers to the idea that significant cultural, historical, or political figures, symbols, and monuments are being removed or downplayed, possibly as part of a larger strategy to reshape or redefine national identity, societal norms, and power structures.

The term “icon” refers not just to physical statues or monuments but can also extend to institutions, traditional values, cultural norms, historical narratives, and influential individuals who have shaped the national consciousness. In this context, the discussion suggests that Trudeau and his administration might be seen as erasing or minimizing these “icons” in a bid to promote a certain political agenda or ideology.

Historically, this kind of action has been associated with various revolutionary movements and regimes that sought to reshape societal values and structures. Here are a few examples:

  1. Russian Revolution (1917): After the Bolsheviks came to power, they undertook a campaign to eliminate symbols of the Tsarist regime. This included the destruction of statues, changing of city names, and rewriting of history textbooks.
  2. Cultural Revolution in China (1966-1976): Led by Mao Zedong, this was an attempt to enforce communism in China by removing capitalist, traditional and cultural elements from Chinese society. It involved purging dissidents, reeducation campaigns, and the destruction of historical relics and artifacts.
  3. Khmer Rouge in Cambodia (1975-1979): The regime led by Pol Pot tried to turn Cambodia into a socialist agrarian republic. They abolished money, free markets, normal schooling, private property, foreign clothing styles, religious practices, and traditional Khmer culture. Cities were evacuated and monuments and relics were destroyed.
  4. The French Revolution (1789-1799): This period saw widespread social and political change in France, accompanied by the removal of symbols of the ancien régime. Churches and royal palaces were destroyed or repurposed, royal statues were torn down, and even the calendar was reformatted.

However, it is important to note that while the “removal of icons” theory can provide a framework for understanding potential cultural shifts, the application of this theory requires careful and evidence-based analysis. The actions of Trudeau and his administration should be scrutinized in light of reliable evidence and factual information rather than speculation or conjecture. Comparing these actions to those of revolutionary movements or regimes must be done with caution due to the significant differences in context and scale. The Canadian context is one characterized by democratic governance, rule of law, and respect for human rights. These historical examples represent extreme cases of societal upheaval and regime change often associated with widespread violence, repression, and human rights abuses.

YouTube Video Clip Title: “Raquel Dancho’s EPIC STAND for Gun Owners (May 8th, 2023)”

YouTube Clip Title:C-21 Fails to Protect Canadians”

Description: “After many months of fighting, the Liberals with the support of their NDP allies have finally forced their deeply flawed Bill C-21 to a vote in the House of Commons. This so-called public safety legislation is a failure on so many fronts. It does nothing to address the real threats of violence in our communities and instead punishes law abiding firearms owners. The Liberals provided no compelling evidence to support their legislation and it is clear that the real goal is to eliminate the culture of responsible legal firearms ownership in this country. I will continue to stand against Liberal legislation that attacks law abiding firearm owners and fight for real consequences for the criminals committing violence in our communities.”

Title of Video: “Must Watch: Introducing an amendment to Bill C-21”

Description: “The speaker is passionately arguing against gun control regulations, emphasizing the limitations of such restrictions, and advocating for the rights of hunters, sports shooters, and others who legally own and use firearms. He cites his own research and statistical analyses, arguing that previous Canadian gun control efforts have not effectively reduced rates of violent crime, homicide, or suicide.”

“He contends that these laws unfairly target responsible firearm owners, such as hunters who contribute significantly to the Canadian economy, while failing to address the root cause of violence, which he sees as being tied to socio-economic issues like unemployment and low income. He further notes that the same firearms being banned for public use are deemed necessary and effective tools for conservation officers in their work, implying a contradiction in policy.”

“The speaker passionately identifies himself as a former conservation officer, park ranger, and hunter, using his personal experience to empathize with those affected by these regulations. He criticizes certain aspects of the legislation as vague, misleading, and potentially open to interpretation, arguing this could lead to an unjust banning of firearms. He is particularly concerned about the impact on sports shooting, and the enjoyment of thousands who participate in these activities.”

“Towards the end of the speech, the speaker proposes an amendment to Bill c21, arguing it should be reviewed again with an aim to ensure that the government cannot take hunting rifles from law-abiding farmers, hunters, and indigenous people.”

“Overall, the speaker strongly emphasizes the rights of law-abiding gun owners, suggesting that gun control laws should focus more on addressing violent crime and socio-economic issues, rather than broadly restricting access to firearms. His speech aims to highlight the perceived flaws and contradictions in current gun control policy, and to propose revisions that better respect the rights and interests of lawful firearm users.”

Video title: MP Morrison stands up for law-abiding gun owners

Description: “In the video clip, MP Morrison is debating a proposed bill, Bill C21, in the Canadian Parliament. The bill is aimed at gun control, and Morrison is raising concerns about its impact on law-abiding gun owners. He believes that the government is unfairly targeting law-abiding citizens who own guns for legitimate purposes, such as hunting, sports shooting, and farming, rather than focusing on the real problem of illegal gun possession and use by criminals.

Morrison criticizes the government’s lack of evidence-based decision-making, arguing that they are driven by political ideology rather than facts. He claims that the rate of crime committed by law-abiding citizens with legal guns is extremely low compared to crimes committed with illegal guns, and accuses the government of ignoring these facts.

He proposes instead to direct resources towards policing, border control, and education programs to prevent youth from joining gangs and engaging in organized crime. Morrison believes that this would be a more effective way to stem the tide of gun violence in Canada.

Furthermore, he criticizes the current bail system, claiming it allows violent criminals to be released too easily, and calls for stricter sentencing laws and reforms to bail rules. He also denounces the government’s plans to appoint a Firearms Advisory Committee that will determine future bans of firearms, which he believes is an attempt to circumvent democratic debate.

In conclusion, MP Morrison calls on the government to base their decisions on evidence rather than ideology and to focus on the actual sources of gun crime rather than targeting law-abiding citizens.

YouTube Video Clip Title: “The woke Liberal approach to gun crime is grounded in absurdity”

Description: “Canadian MP Michael Cooper strongly criticizes the policies of the ruling Liberal government, specifically focusing on what he perceives to be a misdirected approach towards public safety, crime, and firearm control.”

“He begins by laying out a litany of negative statistical trends which he argues have arisen due to the Liberals’ policies, such as increased violent crime rates and homicides, and a decrease in public safety. Cooper contrasts this with the record of the previous Conservative government under Prime Minister Harper, during which he claims violent crime decreased.”

“Cooper contends that the rise in crime is not accidental, but rather the result of deliberate, ‘woke’ criminal justice policies by the Liberals. He accuses them of virtue signalling and importing disastrous policies from the United States. These policies, he says, have been used by radical left-wing city mayors and district attorneys, leading to crime-filled “no-go zones” in American cities like Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, and Portland.”

“Cooper highlights the passage of bill c75 as an example of these policies, arguing that the bill has created a “Catch and Release Bail” system that allows criminals to reoffend soon after being arrested. He provides examples from Vancouver and Edmonton to support his claim.”

“He goes on to discuss bill C5, which he says expands house arrest for serious offenses and eliminates mandatory jail time for serious gun crimes. This, according to Cooper, shows the Liberals are more focused on the object (firearms) rather than the actors (criminals using firearms).”

“Cooper concludes his critique by focusing on bill C21, which he says does not deal with illegal firearms or repeat offenders, but instead targets law-abiding licensed firearm owners. He views this approach as absurd, arguing that this group is least likely to commit a crime, and therefore, should not be the primary target of firearms legislation.”

“Throughout his speech, Cooper’s tone is highly critical and impassioned, with a strong undertone of frustration and concern for public safety. His central argument is that the Liberal government’s policies, in his view, are ill-conceived, counterproductive, and place ideology above evidence and effectiveness in managing crime and public safety.”

However, it’s worth noting that this is a partisan critique and likely represents a political position more than an objective assessment. Different political parties and groups may interpret the impact and effectiveness of these policies differently, and the actual statistical trends in crime and public safety may be influenced by a wide variety of factors beyond the specific policies criticized by Cooper.

SGT Reply: “Thank you for being detailed and crystal clear in your assessment of Bill C-21 and for standing steadfast against rushed policy and ungrounded policy.”

“We grew up with a few American political TV shows, and it was evident in the shows how complex systems resulted in the need for politicians to not serve the constituents. Perhaps it was this reason why we never really paid attention to Canadian politics or trusted by default any political frameworks.”

“But, in recent months, we saw that there are really high quality and profound investigations and speeches being made by the Conservative MPs. And it doesn’t seem to be just one or two MPs, who are engaging in high quality thought and action. It seems astounding, that the political class, even if it’s only one party, can do the same level of duty as other officers of Canada. This is not how society raised us to understand the nature of politics and the debate in a high level place, such as the House of Commons. How can this be? In an era where trust is lost in so many aspects of government, how can the Conservative MP’s hold the line against corruption to such a degree. It boggles the mind.”

“Well thank you for doing that. In fact, by showing loyalty to Canadian citizens, public safety constructs, perhaps it is not good that the red is on the flag of Canada anymore, as that implies that the Liberal Party has or shares some Canadian values an qualities, which cannot be true if they are wiping those qualities and values, and designing new ones, and this is most likely easily provable by almost all intellectuals or typical citizens. It feels to us that Canada was aspirational, in every value or metric you could possibly think of in the 1990s, so that would naturally include freedom, public safety, individual autonomy and authority, sovereignty of state, sovereignty of character and individuality. It seems Canadians at one point wanted to do everything right, and everything to it’s max potential, they looked up to the sky. That quality of having something better for oneself, than what came before, that’s the quality that still lives in the Conservative MPs, which now seems to be the “red” in the Canadian flag, that once we had. Even though red is a nice colour, if it doesn’t mean anything and makes us mean nothing, then Canada’s red, is no longer Canada’s red, but a global red, and as we all know, that red is a dark red. It’s sad to say, at some level, but the Canadian flag should actually have blue colours with a blue Maple right now, since it seems that high quality political work and high quality governance only exists with Conservative MPs and Pierre Poilievre as leader.”

“Well, Michael Cooper, MP & Conservative MPs, thanks for fixing politics and also the country as well! You’ve made it even harder to find a bad Conservative MP. Are there any bad ones left?”

To see our Donate Page, click https://skillsgaptrainer.com/donate

To go back to our Home Page, click https://skillsgaptrainer.com

To see our Instagram Channel, click https://www.instagram.com/skillsgaptrainer/

To visit our LinkedIn Page, click https://www.linkedin.com/company/skills-gap-trainer/

To see some of our Udemy Courses, click SGT Udemy Page

To see our YouTube Channel, click https://www.youtube.com/@skillsgaptrainer