Buy Xanax Without Prescription From Reliable Online Pharmacy

Xanax For Sale, Where To Buy Xanax, Buy Xanax Without Prescription, Low Dose Xanax, Doses Xanax Work, Xanax Trusted Pharmacy Reviews, Xanax From Mexico, Xanax Without Prescription, Canada, Mexico, India, Rx Free Xanax, Buy Xanax Without A Prescription, Xanax Used For, Order Xanax Online C.o.d, Generic Xanax, My Xanax Experience, No Prescription Xanax Online, Xanax Photos, Purchase Xanax For Sale, Buy Generic Xanax, Online Buy Xanax Without A Prescription, Herbal Xanax, Xanax Wiki, Xanax Class, Where Can I Buy Xanax Online, Xanax No Prescription, Order Xanax No Prescription, Effects Of Xanax, After Xanax, Xanax Brand Name, Xanax Interactions, Xanax Mg, Xanax Overnight, Xanax Blogs, Xanax Over The Counter, Cheap Xanax, Xanax Pharmacy From Reliable Online Pharmacy


IT guy, code monkey, husband, father, target shooter, but unfortunately not independently wealthy.

Xanax For Sale, Its been a while since I blogged - mainly because things have been in much of a holding pattern for the past while and because there wasn't much going on. Oh I know, there have been a least a dozen attempts at lame "scandals" as of late but it seems that Canadians are a little more interested in their day to day lives than they are in what happens to taliban fighters when they're handed over to their countrymen, where to buy Xanax, what some former-MP is doing in his spare time, Buy Xanax without prescription, or any of the other things the opposition is trying to make stick.

I have, however, low dose Xanax, been following C-391, Doses Xanax work, a private members' bill to scrap the wasteful gun registry, fairly closely. It passed first and second readings fairly easily, Xanax trusted pharmacy reviews, moving on to committee. Xanax from mexico, Mark Holland, the liberal critic on the committee has done his best to scuttle the fair deliberation of the act by purposefully omitting supporters of C-391 from the proposed list of witnesses. In fact, his original witness list had only 4 witnesses in favor of C-391 and dozens that didn't, Xanax For Sale.

The latest bit of political trickery is a bit much though, Xanax without prescription.

Today Canadian Association of Police Chiefs President and Toronto Police Service Chief Bill Blair led a press conference in which the CACP, Canada, mexico, india, together with the Canadian Association of Police Boards (CAPB) and the Canadian Police Association (CPA), officially endorsed the registry.

This probably shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, rx free Xanax. After all, Buy Xanax without a prescription, according to the Globe and Mail the CACP received some $100,000+ from CGI Group (the company responsible for managing the Registry's IT infrastructure) which was used to buy - of all things - concert tickets:

Dr. Xanax For Sale, Jones and the members of the ethics committee were in Montreal in August for two days of meetings around the CACP's annual conference when they learned about Taser's sponsorship and that of others, including a joint Bell Mobility-CGI-Group Techna donation of $115,000, which went toward the purchase of 1,000 tickets at $215 each to a Celine Dion concert on Aug. 25.

Of course, Xanax used for, the CACP missed that little "truth" in their list of important facts Canadians apparently needed to know. Order Xanax online c.o.d, They also failed to mention that their own ethics director quit in August of 2009 over donations like the one from CGI and others from the likes of Tazer.

Instead the CACP has setup a website called "" where they make a rather amateurish attempt at dispelling what they think are the "myths" that surround the registry. In reality, generic Xanax, most of their talking points are half-truths, My Xanax experience, if not outright lies, designed to fool people who don't know anything about guns, the registry, no prescription Xanax online, or the web of laws that govern firearms in Canada.

Now, that is bad enough, Xanax For Sale. Xanax photos, But here's the kicker. If you're in Ontario you probably helped pay for this poorly executed bit of propaganda.

A quick query to the CIRA whois engine gives us this:

Domain name:
Domain name status: EXIST
Domain number: 3412626
Approval date: 2010/04/15
Renewal date: 2011/04/15
Updated date: 2010/04/15
Registrar name: easyDNS Technologies Inc.
Registrar number: 88
Registrant name: Toronto Police Service
Registrant number: 53968
Registrant description: Police Services for the City of Toronto
Administrative contact
Name: Pedja Ljubomirovic
Job title: Webmaster
Postal address: Toronto Police Service
40 College Street
Toronto ON M5G 2J3 Canada
Phone: +1 (416) 808-7106
Fax: +1 (416) 808-7102
Technical contact
Name: Pedja Ljubomirovic
Job title: Webmaster
Postal address: Toronto Police Service
40 College Street
Toronto ON M5G 2J3 Canada
Phone: +1 (416) 808-7106
Fax: +1 (416) 808-7102

So, purchase Xanax for sale, the website isn't owned or run by the CACP - a lobby group - but instead by the Toronto Police Service. Buy generic Xanax, That's right, taxpayer funded TPS is hosting the site - and providing the webmaster. Xanax For Sale, Now, I'm no expert on the Police Services Act but I'm pretty sure the following sections might apply:
46. No municipal police officer shall engage in political activity, online buy Xanax without a prescription, except as the regulations permit. Herbal Xanax, R.S.O. 1990, c, Xanax wiki. P.15, Xanax class, s. 46.

49, Xanax For Sale. (1) A member of a police force shall not engage in any activity,

(a) that interferes with or influences adversely the performance of his or her duties as a member of a police force, where can i buy Xanax online, or is likely to do so;

(b) that places him or her in a position of conflict of interest, Xanax no prescription, or is likely to do so;

(c) that would otherwise constitute full-time employment for another person; or

(d) in which he or she has an advantage derived from employment as a member of a police force. R.S.O. 1990, order Xanax no prescription, c. Effects of Xanax, P.15, s. 49 (1).

Xanax For Sale, Now, maybe if Dr. Jones, after Xanax, the CACP's ethics chair, Xanax brand name, hadn't quit last year he might be able to explain to Bill Blair whether or not its a conflict of interest to have a TPS employee setup a website lobbying in favor of a registry that is run by a company that gives the organization you're the president of some $115,000 dollars as "donations". Obviously such a complex ethical question would take someone with a PHD to figure out, Xanax interactions.

I wonder if the folks on the Police Services Board know their already tight budget is being wasted by Chief Blair to support the registry so the CACP can keep buying its members tickets to see Celine Dion. Xanax mg, Update #1:

Welcome to all the readers from SDA.

Update #2 (May 6, 2010 @ 12:30pm EDT):

I decided to do a little more digging, Xanax For Sale. is a CNAME record that resolves to @ That IP is part of the netblock reserved for Korax Inc., Xanax overnight, a web-hosting provider located in Burlington, Xanax blogs, Ontario.

Domain Type Class TTL Answer A IN 10800

Hop T1 T2 T3 Best Graph IP Hostname Dist TTL Ctry Time
1 1 1 * 0.4 ms AS21844
THEPLANET-AS 255 US Unix: 16:11:40.392
2 0 3 * 0.4 ms [+0ms] AS21844
THEPLANET-AS 0 miles [+0] 254 US Unix: 16:11:40.418
3 0 0 * 0.4 ms [+0ms] AS21844
THEPLANET-AS 0 miles [+0] 62 US [Router did not respond]
4 1 1 * 1.0 ms [+0ms] AS3549
GBLX 0 miles [+0] 252 US Unix: 16:11:40.503
5 46 * * 46 ms [+45ms] AS3549
GBLX 0 miles [+0] 246 US [Router did not respond]
6 47 * * 47 ms [+0ms] AS174
COGENT 0 miles [+0] 245 US [Router did not respond]
7 62 52 * 52 ms [+5ms] AS174
COGENT 0 miles [+0] 245 US [Router did not respond]
8 60 * * 60 ms [+7ms] AS174
COGENT 0 miles [+0] 245 US [Router did not respond]
9 * * * 60 ms [+0ms]

[Unknown] [Unknown - Firewall did not respond] 0 miles [+0]
10 60 60 * 60 ms [+0ms] AS18650
[Reached Destination] -1 miles [+0] 52 CA [Router did not respond

A quick trip to's Reverse IP Lookup tool shows us that there are only 4 sites hosted on - the other three:, Xanax over the counter, and Cheap Xanax, Now, seems to resolve to a placeholder but its obvious the other two sites belong to the Toronto Police Service. Xanax For Sale, So, is this a co-located server owned by the TPS. Is it a server they're leasing, Xanax pharmacy. Or is it a shared server that just "happens" to be running the TPS's site.

In any case its pretty clear whose footing the bill for - Toronto taxpayers.

In a final bit of irony, Toronto happens to be a bandwidth hub chock-a-block with ISPs and hosting providers. Odd that the TPS had to go outside of the city to host their site.

Similar posts: Buy Lamisil Without Prescription. Buy Imitrex Without Prescription. Bromazepam For Sale. Retin-A australia, uk, us, usa. Fast shipping Ambien. Get Sildenafil Citrate.
Trackbacks from: Xanax For Sale. Xanax For Sale. Xanax For Sale. Xanax no prescription. No prescription Xanax online. Order Xanax online c.o.d.

9 Responses to “Xanax For Sale”

  1. We’re on the same wavelength. I was wondering what the Act says.

    Thanks for finding it.


  2. Top notch, Rafael.

    Mark Peters

  3. Every honest Canadian reading this article should write a personal letter to a list of people: their MPP, TO police commissioner, TO council members, TO mayor and attach this article. This must go to review boards if not courts. If Bruce Montague was guilty of opposing bill C68 and deserved to be imprisoned, then those responsible for wasting tax $$ on lobbying should face similar grilling.

    Will Die For Freedom

  4. Forwarded the information to my MP, the PC party of Ont, and to kelly at the NP

    Great job Rafael


  5. Good research. Gotta get more publicity. Mike Duffy sounds like a likely candidate.


  6. Thank you for this, I hope the eggs sticks firmly to their faces.


  7. [...] including the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP). The CACP, you’ll recall, received over $100,000 from CGI Group – the company with contracts for supporting the IT infrastructure of the Firearms [...]

    Trapped in Suburbia… » Blog Archive » Is the RCMP funding the gun control lobby?

  8. 1)
    The Firearms Registry is a financial boondoggle & costs billions to run.

    In 2009, it cost $4.1 million to operate the long gun registry.

    Actually, the annual budget of the CFC is ~$100 million. Of this amount it is reasonable to expect that a sizable portion is spent on the paperwork arising from 7 million guns as compared to that arising from 2 million gun owners. At any rate, this figure does not account for the huge associated costs of policing the registry on the street and in the courts.

    There’s too much red tape in registering a long gun.

    Registrations or transfers are done over the phone or online in a matter of minutes.

    Just because an unnecessary intrusion is made “easy” is not in itself justification for that intrusion. Even were it so, trusting your legal safety to a nameless bureaucrat’s voice over the phone is naive folly.

    It’s expensive to register/transfer a long gun.

    It’s free.

    Oh really? Where exactly does the tax money funding this system come from then? Thin air? No government program is ever “free”.

    The gun registry targets the wrong people.

    As of 2009, 111,533 firearms were seized by police for public safety reasons or after criminal use. 87, 893 were long guns.

    And exactly how many of these were the duly registered long guns held by licensed lawful gun owners vs the illegally possessed, smuggled, unregistered guns of repeat violent offenders? Oh, right 2.5% according to VPC report.

    Criminals use handguns. Long guns are used by law-abiding hunters and farmers.

    Not always. Of the 16 police officer shooting deaths since 1998, 14 were committed with a long gun. In 2007, about 15% of known firearm homicides in Canada were committed with a long gun.

    First off, lawful gun owners never claimed that lon guns are never used as weapons by violent offenders. Of course they are. They just aren’t used very often compared to other items. Guns are abused in a minority of crimes compared to other tools, which account for 85% of homicides. As for danger to the police, please tell me how a lawful owner registering his/her long gun in any way stops an act of violence. The biggest risk to cops’ lives is actually the cars they drive around in all day. Road traffic accident is the biggest killer of on-duty police members while the health effects of a sessile lifestyle account for the majority of their off-duty deaths. Of course, registering their cars has done nothing to stop this, has it?

    Police don’t support the CFP.

    All of the major Canadian organizations representing police support the registration of all firearms in Canada.

    Actually, it is the executive committees of these organizations, a mere handful of people nation wide, who support the long gun registry. The real opinion of most cops is they could care less. There are also many actively opposed to it as per the viewpoints expressed here: Unfortunately, these members are vastly underrepresented on the executive committees of the police organizations for purely political reasons.

    Police don’t use the gun registry or the CFP’s other services.

    Police across Canada access the Firearms Registry online on average 11,076 times a day, 2,842 of those queries for addresses involving community safety incidents.

    Again, lawful gun owners never made this claim. What we claim is that the majority of these queries are automated computer requests that occur whenever anyone’s name is entered into a police computer for any reason. Very few, only 2.5% in fact, are intentional queries by members seeking to know whether-or-not the person they are researching has any guns registered to their name. The answers they get are meaningless: Positive results say only that the person in question has been licensed to own firearms and has one registered. It says nothing about where that gun is at the current time. A negative response does not guarantee the absence pf guns as the violent criminal most assuredly will not be licensed or have registered guns and so will not appear in a registry query.

    The Firearms Registry online has no impact on Police.

    It does impact officer safety as evidenced by the fact that police used it 4,042,859 times last year.

    The Registry’s vocal mouthpieces have variously claimed that the police query the Registry 5000, no 6000, er make that 8000, I mean 11,000, actually 12,000 times each and every day. It seems that every time they open their mouths, the claimed number of queries climbs. At this rate, pretty soon they will be making more queries daily than there are records in the Registry, but I digress…

    Lets assume for a minute that the 12,000 figure is incontestably correct and the police actually do query the Registry every 7 seconds. That means they query the Gun Registry 4.38 million times last year. Let us pretend this has some societal benefit.

    Let’s forget for the nonce that nearly without exception these were automated queries that are performed by police computers every time someone’s name is entered and pretend that they were actually intentionally done by concerned police officers who wanted to know with certainty whether-or-not the person they were about to interact with was law-abiding and unarmed and not a violent sociopath packing heat. Let us further pretend that the answers they got from the registry could accurately reflect their risk as they approached the person in question. We will ignore the facts that career criminals do not license themselves nor register their illegally obtained firearms and so a negative response does not mean with certainty that there are no guns present . We will also ignore that a positive response does not by any means guarantee that guns are in fact present. Most of all we will refuse to accept that negative registry responses say nothing at all about the characters of those present whereas positive responses show at the very least the people in question have passed stringent background checks and screens, and may actually be a safer bet than those who do not have firearms and have not been screened.

    Just as the CACP and other Registry proponents do, let us further assume without any substantiating evidence, that the trend toward lessening of long gun related murder and suicide claimed by the CACP, (and also the CAEP and the CGC) actually exists, that it represents a true drop in murder and suicide and not just a switching of methods, and that it is entirely the result of the long gun registry these groups are so fanatically defending in the media, not the natural result of an aging population.

    Exactly what is the value of the registry? How much bang do we get for our buck? Current estimates of the decline in gun deaths between 1995 and present place this figure at about 4%.

    Therefore it takes 4.38 million queries to ostensibly prevent 4% of gun related deaths. This equates to about 50 per year. Thus the number of queries needed to “save” one life is 87,600. Even more telling, there are 7 million guns in the system. So we must register 140,000 guns per life “saved”. There are some 5 million lawful gun owners in the system, meaning that we must intrude on 100,000 harmless lawful citizens to stop one gun death. The annual cost of the registry is ~$100 million. So every year we must spend $2 million to “save” a single life. Over the last 10 years we have spent $2 billion to “save” 500, or $4 million per life “saved”.

    In medicine we have a concept called “Number Needed to Treat” (NNT) that gives an idea of the beneficial value of a proposed screening, prevention, or treatment program. Acceptable NNTs in most fields of medicine are in the 5 – 20 range. Very rarely we may find one in the 100 – 500 range. It is generally held that higher NNTs represent wasteful practices and that the money and expertise they represent should be used to better effect elsewhere (1).

    In the case of the gun registry, however, we are expected to accept a NNT of 87,600 (queries), 100,000 (persons licensed), or 140,000 (guns registered). We are told repeatedly by the registry’s proponents that “If it just saves one life, then it is worth it”. The problem is, we cannot show any evidence that any lives actually are saved by the gun registry, and even if they were, we could save a heck of a lot more by pursuing more effective strategies.

    You would think that the CACP and its talking heads would realize that every time they inflate their claimed number of queries, they are actually arguing against the usefulness of the gun Registry.

    The CFP does not save lives. The CFP does more than register guns.

    It’s another tool that assists police in making informed decisions that contribute to community safety.

    See my answer to (8) above. To continue the tool analogy, I have lots of tools in my tool box. Some are useless and should not have been bought. I only found this out when I got them home and tried them out. What may have seemed like a good idea in the store turned out to be a mistake in the real world of my workshop. The same can be said of the Gun Registry.

    The “gun registry” database has been breached over 300 times by hackers – our information isn’t safe.

    Wrong. The CFP’s national database has never been breached by hackers. Information is safe and secure.

    No one needs to “hack” this data base when the government itself has released confidential information to a variety of third parties over the years. One such release was in the news when a polling firm was given a copy of the licensees’ private information. Two years ago there was a spate of targeted break-and-enters against lawful gun owners in and around Toronto. This was when Mayor Miller’s pogrom against legal gun ownership and use was in full swing. I wonder how the criminals knew whose houses to rob? At any rate, most successful “hacking” involves inside work. The fact is the information is there to be illegally taken or legally released. Therefore it poses a real danger to lawful gun owners.

    M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike)
    Rural Family Physician,
    Box 13, 120 Cameron Rd.
    Sherbrooke, NS
    Canada B0J 3C0

    “Hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst”.

    ** Please always use BCC and erase appended address lists when forwarding or sending to groups **

    M.J. Ackermann, MD

  9. Does “” constitute “lobbying” or is it merely “propaganda”?


Leave a Reply