Why not write orgasm relieves sinus congestion? Do we need to codify how orgasm arrives? What about a stampede of angry zebras? That usually does the trick for me

I take that point. I also make the point that at the beginning of most revolutions the outcome is unknown. Entrenchment of a new regime can only be understood once the outcome has been decided. To make your argument you are permitted to accept or discount revolutions according to your whim.

My entire point was about historical tipping points. In this very simple concept I have been misunderstood. One person accused me of encouraging revolt. You seem to think that my argument doesn’t work because a great many revolutions fail. You are right. A great many do. But I’m not advocating for revolts nor suggesting that they always work. I’m saying that when conditions reach a certain point, they are almost inevitable. Not always even then. North Korea is a case in point.

I don’t know about that? France, the United States, China, Cuba, Vietnam, Philippines, Nicolae Ceaușescu in Romania, the fall of the Romanovs in Russia were all a thing.

Besides which, I think that you are missing my point. Success isn’t guaranteed in Revolution, that’s why I included 1905. I was talking about tipping points that lead to revolution. What happens next can go either way.

The wet fart bit is that you just used Hati to disprove a point that I never made in the first place.

I’ve got no advice to give. Just making a historical observation.

Over time patterns in human societies emerge. Pointing them out doesn’t constitute advice, nor the promotion of events. Sadly, we can be prisoners of those events, mostly events that are beyond any individual’s control.

Spotting smoke on a far distant ridgeline doesn’t cause the fire that comes roaring down towards your house.

In my long study of history there is always a tipping point. 1789, 1840, 1905, 1917 - people just took power back, or made a serious effort to do the same. Not that it was perfect either. The history of humanity is one of struggle against the elites.

In the case of the US, corporations being recognised as actual living, breathing human beings only made revolution a certainty. The only question is when? I’m an old fart, so I hopefully won’t be around to see the inevitable chaos.

I dunno man. You may be some flavour of libertarian, but not me. I am aware of the libertarian philosophy, and it is particularly an American following.

Freedom has many meanings to many people. But a free society also imposes restrictions on people’s freedom. You just can’t kill someone who annoys you. You need a proper licence in order to drive on public thoroughfares. You can’t take something that doesn’t belong to you, just because you want it. Living in a free society also imposes obligations. Other people must be taken into consideration.

In the case of vapes, and other poisons, it’s not good enough to just yell freedom and allow corporations to to sell dangerous products. Kids consume these products and their health can be affected. In a free society public health considerations will probably impact on people’s freedom. After all, seatbelts continue to save thousands and thousands of lives despite some folks feeling salty about wearing them. At least they are breathing and feeling salty.

None of this will convince you, and that’s ok. I don’t have skin in your game anyway because I don’t live in your country and therefore accept normal restrictions. If I want to live in a society and change the rules, I’ll vote for a person who will do that. Gerrymandering is illegal in my country and fair voting is the norm. I’m also glad that I don’t live in a community where individuals get to decide what rules they should follow on the basis of some nebulous concept of personal freedom.

Thanks for the discussion, by the way.

I guess that you have to live outside the US to see what a scary man-baby it is. If a country has all the power in the world, and then decides that rules don’t apply to them, it quite a short step to wishing that they would fail and leave the rest of us alone. The delusion is that they have adopted the world cop role. The reality is that they are the world bully.

Defending addiction in the name of freedom is a silly hill to die on.

How about killing off gerrymandering in the name of freedom?

This is probably a shock for you to learn, but on a public forum it’s possible to draw conclusions from any source and not just repeat the OPs post.

That makes a ton of difference to the dead schoolkids.

The only country in NATO to invoke the defence retaliation clause in 60 years is the US, following SEP 11.

Well, it’s a vote on a historical actuality. Like a vote on water being wet. It’s not about wacking anybody.

The fact that the countries voting against lived history speaks to the truth of it needing to be addressed.

Racism and inequality exist everywhere, man. It just does. I’ve seen it in France, Germany, England, Singapore and India. It definitely exists in Australia. If you think guns will fix the problem, or even alleviate it, you will have to show me the evidence, because the US is awash in firearms and things aren’t improving. Especially for POC.

What it boils down to, every damn time, is the idea of American exceptionalism. It won’t work in America because reasons. Even if systems are placed in other countries, and work fine, it won’t work in the states. It is one of the reasons why the US won’t adopt the metric system. Only the US and two third world countries haven’t made the switch. That’s fine, but American exceptionalism has now led you guys into a war that nobody wanted except Israel. Even two thirds of your own country don’t want it. This is not a question of gun control, it’s an issue of talking yourself into a position, and defending it to the literal death of your own people.

I’m not going to try and convince you anymore. It’s no skin off my nose how America runs it’s own country. But Americans aren’t all that special. People in other countries laugh, poop, sleep, cry, drive, walk and sing, etc. Any system can be adopted if the will of the people want it badly enough. And you guys apparently want to be the world leaders in gun deaths per capita, and that’s your decision. But don’t try to blame it on the belief that you are an extraordinary different people. You’ve not.

Ok, then what is the truth?

That response lacks internal logic.

1. The countries I mentioned, including Australia, have a multifaceted solution. Heavy restrictions on weapon ownership. A very strict permit system. A refusal to grant a permit until authorised training has been completed. A valid reason for gun ownership (such as membership in a gun club). Mandatory gunsafe compliance - the police can do spot checks on gun storage without a warrant. These are a suite of Solutions, not a single magic bean that you suggest are impossible, except they are possibly.

2. You refer to the likelihood of getting rid of guns because of Trump’s fascist state? Is that the latest excuse? What was the problem before 2016 then?

Look, American gun culture is what it is. It probably is impossible now to reverse things. But own it and don’t keep coming up with all these nonsensical excuses because they work fine in peer countries.

I did a bit of research myself. A few Nordic countries, and New Zealand, have high gun ownership and low gun death rates.

It seems that the difference is that these countries have very high gun regulations, strict purchase and permit laws and restrictions on storage. I’m not an American, but in truth, is this the case in the US? For instance, none of these countries permit handgun open carry. In Australia owning a handgun at all is next to impossible (almost) and the requirements hardly make it worthwhile for target shooters.

It would help if you name these countries and their stats. Not giving you homework to do, but it is an empty statement to make after the OP posted actual data.

Happy to accept that the US isn’t a standalone if we see your information.

So, Australia doesn’t publicly fund mental health treatment and still hav3 way, way less gun deaths.

We also have way less guns.

You guys have stock standard excuses. None of them are true.

Explain which bit is cherry picked and why? Is it disputed that the US has very high gun ownership and very high gun deaths when compared to other first world countries?

Why all the side issues. Is it true, or not?

If it is true, and I believe that it is, it may explain why you are triggered?