Which is the most valuable to protect?

That’s exactly what dies happen. Like I said some states are wild west but alot are the opposite law wise

Rob Roy said:

I don't think "public owned" is the right word to use, it's the word "they" want people to use, but most government entities are not really owned by the public. For instance, if "we" own the military, how come you or I can't say, "stop killing people half way around the world, and until you do, I ain't paying you" ?

When police or any other government "service" provides a service, they don't get real consumer feedback, since the customer is captive and can't escape paying for a "service" at least some of the individuals in the public never asked for or wanted.

That feature, a captive customer base, doesn't provide the market feedback mechanism that a private service provider gets. If consumers have choices and could walk away from a lousy government service provider, like they can with private business which must compete for your business, the service provider is incentivized to improve or go out of business.

In that sense, the public has more choice and the business arrangements are voluntary versus held together by threats of force...with guns. (which is how so called "public services are paid for).

Glad we agree, on fuck the police though! Useless cowardly parasites enforcing laws, many (most) of which have nothing to do with actual justice.

Click to expand...

Didn't they do just that in Vietnam? if enough voters march then Gov will do the bidding of its people. Your money doesn't pay the soldiers- the tax pool does. Its no longer your money once its given to the collective. Its harder in countries where only a small % of the population vote but it still happens.

Again if people vote then its in the best interest of the government to make the services work well. Privatisation in my experience leads to higher cost and less customer service.
Eg is that as you know we have to vote. Voting is incredibly easy here. In America voting is not required and its harder to vote.

bam0813 said:

That’s exactly what dies happen. Like I said some states are wild west but alot are the opposite law wise

Click to expand...

Thats why it has to be a federal approach. Not a mismatch of laws.

Grandpapy said:

You can look up the labor party and see where they place their values, time off for family, wages that provide comfort and stability.

Or just spend a few years there.

Click to expand...

Its a shame America never got to have a peoples party. Instead they are stuck between two far right conservative parties.

A different view is that more guns in more hands in more situations results in more shootings, more menacing/brandishing charges, more *bodies* - and more general alarm at the prevalence of weapons & the frequency with which they’re used.

It’s really pretty simple: all gun-owners are *law-abiding* gun-owners until they break the law. People who do NOT go armed rarely shoot people…pretty obvious to me, but then, I’m not pining for the fjords of yesteryear, when organized gang violence was BIG NEWS.

If you have any data supporting your idea that ‘as guns get scarce, there are more shootings’, I’d love to see it. I’m sure a lot of people would love to see it.

Click to expand...

Yeah except I never presented that idea. I mentioned that the amount of regulations are increasing with the shootings, then you kinda went on your own tangent. And do you really need data for that? I thought one thing we could all agree on is that in the last 100 years school shootings have gone up. The century parameter was arbitrary. Make it a decade or 5, doesn't matter.

Would you not agree these have gone up from whichever point you wish to start measurement?

Same for the guns. It's not exactly genius-tier to know and simply acknowledge there are more gun laws now that last year.

Face it, neither of us knows any details about how guns were purchased 100 years ago…and being fixated on how different it was 100 years ago isn’t doing your ‘argument’ any good at all: that was during Prohibition, when we had Al Capone, Lucky Luciano, and Murder, Inc. - that is, the rise of the Mafia & “organized crime”, and killing sprees that are *still* shocking. Getting guns during THAT doesn’t seem to have been much different then now…just, probably NOT thru the mail.

Click to expand...

We know that you could clip an ad or order form from a catalog, put it in an envelope with a check, wait 6 or 8 weeks for delivery, and a weapon of war in .45 or .308 would arrive at your doorstep with no background checks or age restrictions. "High capacity" magazines as well. We know that that M1 Carbine you mentioned earlier was a staple of civility with 25 round magazines and that it is much more powerful than the AR-15 platform.

Don't misconstrue that though, if the AR platform were never invented I have no doubt these wackos would use an M1 just the same. So I'm wondering if all this simply isn't a guns fault like we like to think but perhaps a fault of values as the poll indicates in the title.

That you don't think that it seems different than now is why I raised it. Not you or *you* mind you, but in fact I hear a lot of people say that guns are just so much easier to get these days, and there is just no truth in that. So its not an argument really but I just imagined plotting the two trends and they are both trending up. I am not sure to what degree but this is pretty obvious and doesn't need peer reviewed studies or anything.

I’ll agree that YOUR take on it (the ‘unavailability’ of firearms) is subjective - you’re still stuck on that 100-years-ago idea. There’s an INSANE level of weaponry in public hands today, with there being significantly more than one gun per gun owner, RIGHT NOW, to start with.

Click to expand...

Thats fair, but it depends on what state you're in. California has background checks for ammo I'm pretty sure. No derringers, AR's have to have these grip things and I think the mags cant be detachable? I know the stats on how many guns there are here. Its about 400 million which is over 70 times more that Police, SWAT, ect. and Military combined. Its not a 100 year old idea and I am not denying there are more firearms now than 100 years ago at all.

Your notion that shootings are going UP be cause weapons are going DOWN makes no sense: shootings are increasing as the number of weapons ON THE STREET increases. Recent SCROTUS rulings have vastly increased the number of places people can carry concealed without license or permit - people who don’t NEED to*get* guns, because they *HAVE* guns. And then there’s OPEN carry - which, like it or not, does not and *has not* reduced violence ANYWHERE. The recent NRA convention in Houston WOULD NOT ALLOW MEMBERS TO OPEN-CARRY on the convention floor. That’s some stone-cold irony right there.

Click to expand...

This is interesting because I noticed that school shootings are going up as regulations not gun count is going up. And then you point out that the black market or street count has increased. It would be interesting to see per capita data on that.

Incorrect about the SCOTUS ruling, the ruling was that "may issue" permit schemes are unconstitutional but "shall issue" was ok. I think Roberts was the one who wrote about that in his concurrence. Basically NY was denying concealed permits unless an extraordinary need could be demonstrated. NY determined that self defense was not proper cause for regular people who were not celebrities, billionaires, politicians ect. This was deemed a violation of the 14th amendment equal protection.

The part to really grasp imho is the "text as informed by history" part which remains the only test in 2a cases. This has pretty huge implications, one example was I mulling: felons. If a felon comes out of prison and served his or her debt to society, they cant own firearms, vote sometimes ect. But if we use text as informed by history we see that at the time of the text, you came out of prison and they handed you back your guns and you could go to the polls.

Bagginski said:

…so…your plan is to pay every armed person a “don’t kill any kids” retainer, in hopes that they’ll take the money instead of killing kids? That’s gonna blow a huge hole in every budget…and do you have ANYTHING to point at that makes you believe that surrounding ourselves with weapon-carriers would mean anything in terms of crime & deaths by shooting?

What about all the weapon-carriers who *aren’t* on retainer? Shall we rely on “Christian charity”?

Click to expand...

No, it is not my plan. My kids teachers can opt to conceal carry. Some do. I'm glad of that in these times. Hell dude even in California the Superintendents on campus' can grant permission for adults to carry. I find this is a good immediate solution while everyone waxes philosophical about gun laws until the politicians get bribed to do whatever they do decades from now either way.

The "paid well" part is frankly because anyone whos job it is to take bullets for others should probably be paid well imho. I don't have a gotcha type argument here except I'm betting you cant find any examples of armed guardians at school shooting children. That idea doesn't even sit well with most prisoners. So when you say that going to blow a huge hole in every budget as you suggested a retainer for not doing as such, I'm going to need lots of examples, or at leas quite a few.

Grandpapy said:

You can look up the labor party and see where they place their values, time off for family, wages that provide comfort and stability.

Or just spend a few years there.

Click to expand...

Ah so a different value system. So what do you think it is that has changed in our value system to this point that these shootings have increased?

Lucky Luke said:

I was a Private school boy.
Private or public should have no fencers not sure what fees should have to do with fencers and metal detectors and armed guards.

We have a perminate gun amnesty in my state. Other states have gun amnesty's a couple times a year. Its for people who come across a gun or have a gun that they no longer want. It may be registered or it may not be. The handing in person may have a gun licence or not. They can contact their local police or fire arms dealer and take it in no questions asked.

Click to expand...

Oh ok thanks, Ive never heard of that. I find it ironic here in the US that the politicians all seem to put their kids in private schools yet expect us, the great unwashed to deal with fences, ever lowering grade scales and arbitrary birthday cutoffs ect.

ActionianJacksonian said:

Ah so a different value system. So what do you think it is that has changed in our value system to this point that these shootings have increased?

Click to expand...

Being satisfied working at Wal-Mart.

ActionianJacksonian said:

Ah so a different value system. So what do you think it is that has changed in our value system to this point that these shootings have increased?

Click to expand...

Much different, we went a different way than America did in the 80's but it was the Conservative party who introduced our gun laws in 1996.
The shooting's have increased because you have more guns that fire more often and have a gun culture.

Lucky Luke said:

Much different, we went a different way than America did in the 80's but it was the Conservative party who introduced our gun laws in 1996.
The shooting's have increased because you have more guns that fire more often and have a gun culture.

Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on what you mean by more guns that fire more often?

Grandpapy said:

Being satisfied working at Wal-Mart.

Click to expand...

How would the labor party produce satisfied walmart employees?

PopAndSonGrows said:

What is "most valuable to protect" is completely subjective per household. We dont have kids, so that doesn't apply to me? Or do you mean like all the children of the world?. .. if so, why would i give a shit about all the Jewelry of the world as one of the other options? Makes no sense.

So, we have no kids. .. we don't possess enough jewelry to "protect" but it's insured anyway. ... my money is "safe" from a modern standpoint. .. and i give zero fucks about any politician's safety but I 100% wish none any harm, even the kooky wacknuts they don't deserve death threats.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure at this point I did a bad job in not really explaining the poll. Fwiw I was not baked when I made it.

I get what you're saying about not having kids and yeah for sure I kinda meant in general at school. And money I was thinking old school vault with armed guards.

Lucky Luke said:

Its no longer your money once its given to the collective.

Click to expand...

Are you sure the word "given" matches the reality of what happens?

ActionianJacksonian said:

Can you elaborate on what you mean by more guns that fire more often?

Click to expand...

The US ratio of 120.5 firearms per 100 residents, up from 88 per 100 in 2011, far surpasses that of other countries around the world.
More recent data also suggests that gun ownership grew significantly over the last several years. One study, published by the Annals of Internal Medicine in February, found that 7.5 million US adults - just under 3% of the population - became first new gun owners between January 2019 and April 2021.
This, in turn, exposed 11 million people to firearms in their homes, including 5 million children. About half of new gun owners in that time period were women, while 40% were either black or Hispanic.
A separate study, published by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2021, linked a rise in gun ownership during the pandemic to higher rates of gun injuries among - and inflicted by - children.





With regards to comparable democracies Australia’s homicide rate is similar to that in the UK (which, in 2011, was 1 per 100,000 compared to 1.1 in Australia). The US was most dangerous at 4.7, compared to Sweden at 0.9.

But Australia’s rate is much lower than the average global homicide rate of 6.2 per 100,000, as estimated by the United Nations Global Study on Homicide report. Countries with high homicide rates in 2012 included Colombia (30., Mexico (21.5), and South Africa (31).

.

Rate of fire. Guns that fire more often have a higher rate of fire. Eg is weapons designed to shoot humans like Assault rifles.

Rob Roy said:

Are you sure the word "given" matches the reality of what happens?

Click to expand...

Contributed would be a better word.

Lucky Luke said:

The US ratio of 120.5 firearms per 100 residents, up from 88 per 100 in 2011, far surpasses that of other countries around the world.
More recent data also suggests that gun ownership grew significantly over the last several years. One study, published by the Annals of Internal Medicine in February, found that 7.5 million US adults - just under 3% of the population - became first new gun owners between January 2019 and April 2021.
This, in turn, exposed 11 million people to firearms in their homes, including 5 million children. About half of new gun owners in that time period were women, while 40% were either black or Hispanic.
A separate study, published by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2021, linked a rise in gun ownership during the pandemic to higher rates of gun injuries among - and inflicted by - children.

View attachment 5162435

View attachment 5162436

Rate of fire. Guns that fire more often have a higher rate of fire. Eg is weapons designed to shot humans like Assault rifles.

Click to expand...

So who created the pandemic? Covid-19 did not close a single business or school to the point that children were literally committing suicide on Zoom while their parents were despairing in the living room over their resturaunt being closed for a year and their whole life being in foreclosure as a result.

See now that, was government.
The same people that:

-told us that masks work

-own stock in Pfizer and maderna prolly

-said the lab leak theory was racist

-tried to mandate an injection

-literally watched 3x more naturally immune Healthcare workers be fired when they were the best option for vulnerable patients and we know the cdc knew natural immunity was way better long before the injection mandates because foia

-Literally funded gain of function research in Wuhan(monkey pox now)

-inflated the world reserve currency to the point we really all should admit the full faith and credit of The US is laughable, I'm sure you're feeling these inflationary effects

- kidnaps its own citizens to experiment LSD on in Canada

-indeed spends around $150-200 million per day on "black ops" completely unaccountable to The People, power of the purse my ass

-buys and destroys food from farmers to prop the prices up to make da ekoonomee moor guddar

-during a food shortage no less and that's just getting started really

-drone kills civilians thinking they are terrorists in a country with no declaration of war

- gives Ukrainian civilians weapons I can't own so they may fight an oppressive government

-Literally installed Zelensky

-arms the Taliban with a literal full army supply and air force

-creates neverending win-win schemes for themselves like the cocaine epidemic and the war on drugs to solve it (classic hitler) because they have endless time and fake money to engineer society.....

I'm gonna trust them, to make uniform across the board common sense gun reform to keep us all safe and sound?

Nope.

ActionianJacksonian said:

So who created the pandemic? Covid-19 did not close a single business or school to the point that children were literally committing suicide on Zoom while their parents were despairing in the living room over their resturaunt being closed for a year and their whole life being in foreclosure as a result.

See now that, was government.
The same people that:

-told us that masks work

-own stock in Pfizer and maderna prolly

-said the lab leak theory was racist

-tried to mandate an injection

-literally watched 3x more naturally immune Healthcare workers be fired when they were the best option for vulnerable patients and we know the cdc knew natural immunity was way better long before the injection mandates because foia

-Literally funded gain of function research in Wuhan(monkey pox now)

-inflated the world reserve currency to the point we really all should admit the full faith and credit of The US is laughable, I'm sure you're feeling these inflationary effects

- kidnaps its own citizens to experiment LSD on in Canada

-indeed spends around $150-200 million per day on "black ops" completely unaccountable to The People, power of the purse my ass

-buys and destroys food from farmers to prop the prices up to make da ekoonomee moor guddar

-during a food shortage no less and that's just getting started really

-drone kills civilians thinking they are terrorists in a country with no declaration of war

- gives Ukrainian civilians weapons I can't own so they may fight an oppressive government

-Literally installed Zelensky

-arms the Taliban with a literal full army supply and air force

-creates neverending win-win schemes for themselves like the cocaine epidemic and the war on drugs to solve it (classic hitler) because they have endless time and fake money to engineer society.....

I'm gonna trust them, to make uniform across the board common sense gun reform to keep us all safe and sound?

Nope.

Click to expand...

And that reply right there is why America is in decline and will continue to decline at an ever increasing pace.


So your Q and your Poll was just for you to find the question and answer that you wanted all along but didn't actually want to voice.

Lucky Luke said:

And that reply right there is why America is in decline and will continue to decline at an ever increasing pace.


So your Q and your Poll was just for you to find the question and answer that you wanted all along but didn't actually want to voice.

Click to expand...

America is in decline because it lives on credit. You see this is the exact opposite of Capital.

Living on credit is a bit like living on borrowed time, it's just not sustainable.

Canberra is doing it a just as well, just maybe not at a world reserve pace.

ActionianJacksonian said:

America is in decline because it lives on credit. You see this is the exact opposite of Capital.

Living on credit is a bit like living on borrowed time, it's just not sustainable.

Canberra is doing it a just as well, just maybe not at a world reserve pace.

Click to expand...

No, it's much more than that. There's good debt and bad debt. A very big difference.

True, unless there is capital gain.

Not convinced.