Search results

Correction to my last.  There technically ARE CCW permits in Canada.  In practice, they are virtually impossible to obtain.  For example, in 2005 in Ontario, there was a grand total of 13 CCW licenses. So, technically, they exist, but are so rare they are virtually non-existant.

Only when required by military duty. Highly doubtful you'd be allowed to use a privately owned firearm on military duty. There are no concealed carry permits in Canada.

...What?  Where's the sheep?... Dang it...  been had again... At least being a highlander is better than being, of all things, a Welshman.  <shudder>  >:D

No, it really wasn't. Still beats 'Top Gun' though...

Maybe they're just afraid that the French did a better film. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEe3xfWfkG8

According to no one but you.  I'm sorry if that comes as a shock to you, but there's reality for you... You know, I think we may have hit the nail on the head here.  One doesn't get PERs to match one's capabilities.  One gets PERs that reflect one's performance. Any chance that you were a...

...Oh, I dunno.  Seems to me you're making one heck of an assumption that you're alone in that position.  How about being thrown into a WO position as successively both a Cpl and a MCpl? Methinks thine assessment of thine own skills and accomplishments are furiously inflated.

The OP signed up, made these three posts, and hasn't been back since. Don't feed the trolls. Just my opinion, of course...

Exactly how would that work, as the MAcKenzie tartan is far from falling out of production?  Or did the unit buy up some rare tartan that they have no need of?

HEY!  I...  Uhhh...  Well... Thanks.

Okay...  I'm busted... ...shucks...I just thought it was funny and could apply to us just as easily...no offence intended. Besides, what's a little plagarism between allies?  :)

{shared with the usual caveats, etc.  My apologies for not having a link though...  :)  } Canadian Armed Forces to be replaced by the A-Team As part of budget cuts the entire Department of National Defence is to be dismantled and replaced by four soldiers of fortune sent to prison for a crime...

In my personal opinion, the best comment regarding this has come from our British equivalent (Arrse.co.uk): Just my (and Old Snowy's)  2 kopecks.

It's only a flesh wound!  ::)

... yeah, that's likely.  >:D  Okay, it's obviously just me fixating about the sub class/reporting names.  I just wasn't sure if the NATO names were still SOP for the English speaking civilian world - it apparently is.  I'll be quiet now.  Thanks guys!  Now, where did I put my meds?...  :)...

Okay.  I kinda figured it was the hunter/killer they were talking about too, but I just wish they'd be more clear when there's that kind of overlap in the names.  But, as for the "commonly referred to" bit, it depends on what part of the world you hang out in.  In Russia, they are "commonly...

I was with 407 (MP) Sqn in the early 90's.  We often quipped that it was great that the Russians are now our allies, but we wished someone would tell their submarine captains that!

I always get confused by this.  Are they talking about the subs NATO calls "Akula", or the subs the Russians call "Akula"? Schuchka (or "Pike" in English) class submarine - NATO Reporting Name "Akula" (which is Russian for 'shark'). Akula class submarine - NATO Reporting Name "Typhoon".

:rofl:  Having had some experience with that particular line myself...

For some on this site, too long, I'm sure...  >:D  ;D What?  No ping pong balls...  Oh, wait, that was a club in Pattaya...  Sorry, my mind wandered there for a minute...  ;D ;D ;D