u/Panjaab1

I find the prepper community does not talk about this much, but dental hygiene is an extremely important prep. I am not even talking about toothbrushes and toothpaste in your bug out bag. I am talking about going to the dentist and getting a checkup every 6 months to a year.

The reason being is an a time of emergency, a cavity can be extremely painful or deadly depending on the level of shtf. If its a financial emergency a cavity or the potential infection that results can be extremely expensive to get fixed if you don't have insurance.

In a full out shtf situation, a cavity can result in an infection that can spread to your bone and cause sepsis.

TLDR: Its important to have your dental hygiene and health squared away before an shtf situation in the form of check ups.

With the state of firearms in this nation, there has sparked a debate about whether or not firearms should be a right in this country. Ultimately this has been met with some criticism, as a major model of private firearm ownership, is our neighbours to the south. Although this post is about private firearm ownership models across the world, this is not a post intended to incite debate regarding specific gun violence data in the US (handguns and suicides being the leading cause of gun related deaths in the US) and how these facts may nullify the US example being used to justify firearms being seen as a privilege. 

Rather, this post is to remind my fellow Canadian citizens, and firearms owners that there are other viable models, that can be used as a framework to adopt policy here. The 2 primary and notable examples that I am discussing are Switzerland and Czechia (formerly known as the Czech Republic). 

I feel that as Canadian citizens, all or most of us can agree to the necessity of absolute self defense rights, particularly within one’s home. Furthermore, an individual should be legally able to use any means available to them, to defend themselves from the threat posed by an intruder. This brings me to an important distinction within the Czech charter of fundamental rights and freedoms. 

(1) Everyone has the right to life. Human life is worthy of protection even before birth. 

(2) Nobody may be deprived of their life. 

(3) The death penalty is prohibited. 

(4) Deprivation of life is not inflicted in contravention of this Article if it occurs in connection with conduct which is not criminal under the law. The right to defend own life or life of another person also with arms is guaranteed under conditions set out in the law.  

The aforementioned amendments within the Czech charter, guarantee, self defence as a fundamental right and clearly extends to firearms. Considering this, Czechia has extremely low rates of gun crime, while adopting a model that allows for self defense and private firearm ownership. I believe it is important to ask ourselves, why can’t a similar model be adopted here? Often times, the US is used as an example by the anti-gun community to dissuade potential amendments to the Canadian constitution, given the risks. Although understandable, given what is portrayed by the media, the ultimate point is, Canada does not have to adopt a similar culture and set of laws, as proven, safe, and reliable, alternatives exist, while allowing private firearm ownership as well as self defense. 

A secondary example, of well regulated firearms legislation, is Switzerland. 

“The right to acquire, keep and bear arms is guaranteed within boundaries of this law.” 

Switzerland sees extremely low rates of gun crime per capita, even though there is a prideful, and protected firearms culture. Firearms are sown into the fabric, of their society. They are viewed as a tool used for sport and hunting, and not weapons of violence. The civic sense within Switzerland regarding firearms is extremely prevalent amongst the citizens. 

Regardless of where you may land on the spectrum regarding firearms rights/privileges, it would be ignorant to simply say, firearms are dangerous and a model which allows safe usage of a variety of firearms is impossible. There will always be those who disagree with private firearm ownership, such as Natalie Provost, but I feel as Canadians, most of us are sensible people who can acknowledge the significant history of firearms in this country and the amendments needed with regards to self defense. The aforementioned amendments are especially critical in today's society where violent crime and violent home invasions are on the rise. Another significant concept which must not be ignored is firearms culture. Within the 2 examples that were previously discussed, firearms ownership rights are accompanied by responsibilities. These responsibilities are those that are owed to your neighbour, your friends, your family, and yourself, regarding safe usage of firearms and this is particularly what has led to such a prosperous and safe firearm culture.

When I completed my Possessions and Acquisition course, I recall my instructor stating that many canadian citizens are ignorant on the topic of firearms (thinking firearms are illegal, not understanding legislation, etc.), however he also said that it is important to not discuss your firearm ownership in a public sphere for safety reasons. Although this is understandable, I feel that this exact reasoning has led to the demise of firearms culture within Canada and ignorance that so many of our fellow citizens have. This same ignorance can lead people to believe rifles like the GSG-16 should be banned, because they appear a particular way, without accounting for their functionality, and the same can be applied to rifles such as the AR-15. As responsible firearms owners, it is our job to spread our message as to dispel ignorance regarding the culture of firearms in our country. Otherwise, I fear that our fellow neighbours, friends, and family may continue to believe rifles like the GSG-16 or AR-15 should be banned when they are shown on the news because of the stereotypes associated with black rifles. As with any constitutional amendments, a shared firearms culture is equally as important to the flourishing of safe, private firearm ownership within our country and is in large part the reason why models such as those seen in Czechia and Switzerland exist.

Anytime a government attempts to disarm the population, you must ask yourselves why? When considering historical examples, disarmament of the population can often lead to dire consequences. Prominent examples include the Armenian genocide, nazi Germany, and the Bosnian Genocide in which populations were disarmed prior to committed atrocities. Other notable examples include Venezuelan disarmament which allowed for mass overreach and humans rights abuses. The state is ill equipped to take care of the citizen, rather that is a responsibility best left to the citizens themselves.

TLDR:

1. People often use the US firearms laws to dismiss private ownership of firearms within Canada, but other alternatives exist such as Czechia and Switzerland where self defense and private firearms ownership is constitutionally recognized.

2. In both countries, a strong civic sense and responsibility is associated with the right to firearms ownership.

3. Its our job as firearms owners to dispel ignorance regarding "black and scary" rifles amongst our fellow canadian citizens and to introduce them to firearms.

4. A safe and responsible firearms culture is equally as important to constitutional amendments when it comes to a successful firearms culture.